Atheists have nothing to rely on

[outhouse]

... because I don't think gods have human genitals or sex.

Your factually in error bud.

The deity most people call god had a father and a wife originally. [and genitals]

 

[Theweirdtophat]

The problem is that it is not one argument. There are multiple arguments in there. All of them lame.

Yet you offer not a single retort for even one of them. I think I've proved my point. I don't really see how your argument is valid since you've yet to explain why my views are wrong. You have to tell me why it's stupid, not just that it's stupid.

 

[outhouse]

but I always thought the atheist life sounded depressing.

Not believing in mythology is depressing?

If I wanted to stoop to a similar level, I would ask, do people that believe in things that don't even exist hold sanity?

focusing on science and materialism,

Wrong. We just don't believe in mythology or things that don't exist.

It has nothing to do with education many theist and non theist refuse.


Just because education levels have shown to be higher in non theist, means little here in your context which is blatantly obvious .

What do they look forward to when they pass on?

The same EXACT thing that you will endure, your brains stops one day and your dead. The problem is you may not understand is that we only get one life. We know this so we can live our lives more full.

Everyone dies, not everyone truly lives.

Not even getting a chance to see their families again or the afterlife or reincarnate?

Either will you, unless you can prove mythology is actually real.

 

[outhouse]

Not to mention many atheists and materialists forget that the greatest scientists such as George Washington Carver, Leonardo da Vinci and Isaac Newton also happened to have religious backgrounds and openly practiced magic and mysticism.

What a load of unsubstantiated rhetoric. we forgot nothing.

Sir or mam, you need to supply credible sources showing an example of any atheist forgetting theist have contributed to scientific knowledge.

Theist helped to discover the facts behind evolution as well.

Its non sequitur to atheism. Your just making stuff up out of bias and lack of education on these topics.

There were SCIENTISTS yet even they were open minded enough to accept such things

People of all walks of life accept many things, it doesn't build credibility or prove anything.

The idea of a higher power really shouldn't sound impossible.

Then prove your mythology is credible. No one has ever been able to that.

Scientifically a higher power is only in mythology.

Some atheists act like they traveled all over the universe in search of God and couldn't find him.

Rhetoric.

Its on you to prove it exist. To date it does not exist outside theology and mythology which changes worldwide based on geographic location alone

 

[outhouse]

. I think I've proved my point.

You lack knowledge in the subject you show bias and reply anyway to ?

Or that you have no credible backing to substantiate a biased opinion of something you don't understand ?

 

[Koldo]

Yet you offer not a single retort for even one of them. I think I've proved my point. I don't really see how your argument is valid since you've yet to explain why my views are wrong. You have to tell me why it's stupid, not just that it's stupid.

I am not making any argument. I am making statements.

 

[dust1n]

Not to mention many atheists and materialists forget that the greatest scientists such as George Washington Carver, Leonardo da Vinci and Isaac Newton also happened to have religious backgrounds and openly practiced magic and mysticism. There were SCIENTISTS yet even they were open minded enough to accept such things. And no it's not that they were religious because that's what the norm was. There were atheists back then, even before their time, yet these scientists practiced spiritual energy work and these are scientists that our scientists look up to.

They generally aren't remembered for their accomplishments in magic and mysticism. That's because their various faiths never produced peanut butter oil or calculus.

If there wasn't a sliver of truth in religion or magic, you wouldn't see anyone DO that kind of stuff.

What do you mean? So, I can assume that there is a sliver of truth, in Greek mythology?

Disbelieving because the evidence is not there right in front of their face seems narrow-minded to me. Some atheists act like they traveled all over the universe in search of God and couldn't find him. The idea of a higher power really shouldn't sound impossible.

So I take you believe in unicorns, fairys and alchemy as well? Or, is that still narrow??



Relevant Da Vinci quote:

"I am well aware that because I did not study the ancients, some foolish men will accuse me of being uneducated. They will say that because I did not learn from their schoolbooks, I am unqualified to express an opinion. But I would reply that my conclusions are drawn from firsthand experience, unlike the scholars who only believe what they read in books written by others."

"Although I cannot quote from authors in the same way they do, I shall rely on a much worthier thing, actual experience, which is the only thing that could ever have properly guided the men that they learn from."

"These scholars strut around in a pompous way, without any thoughts of their own, equipped only with the thoughts of others, and they want to stop me from having my own thoughts. And if they despise me for being an inventor, then how much more should they be despised for not being inventors but followers and reciters of the works of others."

"When the followers and reciters of the works of others are compared to those who are inventors and interpreters between Nature and man, it is as though they are non-existent mirror images of some original. Given that it is only by chance that we are invested with human form, I might think of them as being a herd of animals."

"Those who try to censor knowledge do harm to both knowledge and love, because love is the offspring of knowledge, and the passion of love grows in proportion to the certainty of knowledge. The more we know about nature, the more we can be certain of what we know, and so the more love we can feel for nature as a whole."

"Of what use are those who try to restrict what we know to only those things that are easy to comprehend, often because they themselves are not inclined to learn more about a particular subject, like the subject of the human body."

"And yet they want to comprehend the mind of God, talking about it as though they had already dissected it into parts. Still they remain unaware of their own bodies, of the realities of their surroundings, and even unaware of their own stupidity."

"Along with the scholars, they despise the mathematical sciences, which are the only true sources of information about those things which they claim to know so much about. Instead they talk about miracles and write about things that nobody could ever know, things that cannot be proven by any evidence in nature."

"It seems to me that all studies are vain and full of errors unless they are based on experience and can be tested by experiment, in other words, they can be demonstrated to our senses. For if we are doubtful of what our senses perceive then how much more doubtful should we be of things that our senses cannot perceive, like the nature of God and the soul and other such things over which there are endless disputes and controversies."

"Wherever there is no true science and no certainty of knowledge, there will be conflicting speculations and quarrels. However, whenever things are proven by scientific demonstration and known for certain, then all quarreling will cease. And if controversy should ever ariseagain, then our first conclusions must have been questionable
"I am well aware that because I did not study the ancients, some foolish men will accuse me of being uneducated. They will say that because I did not learn from their schoolbooks, I am unqualified to express an opinion. But I would reply that my conclusions are drawn from firsthand experience, unlike the scholars who only believe what they read in books written by others."

"Although I cannot quote from authors in the same way they do, I shall rely on a much worthier thing, actual experience, which is the only thing that could ever have properly guided the men that they learn from."

"These scholars strut around in a pompous way, without any thoughts of their own, equipped only with the thoughts of others, and they want to stop me from having my own thoughts. And if they despise me for being an inventor, then how much more should they be despised for not being inventors but followers and reciters of the works of others."

"When the followers and reciters of the works of others are compared to those who are inventors and interpreters between Nature and man, it is as though they are non-existent mirror images of some original. Given that it is only by chance that we are invested with human form, I might think of them as being a herd of animals."

"Those who try to censor knowledge do harm to both knowledge and love, because love is the offspring of knowledge, and the passion of love grows in proportion to the certainty of knowledge. The more we know about nature, the more we can be certain of what we know, and so the more love we can feel for nature as a whole."

"Of what use are those who try to restrict what we know to only those things that are easy to comprehend, often because they themselves are not inclined to learn more about a particular subject, like the subject of the human body."

"And yet they want to comprehend the mind of God, talking about it as though they had already dissected it into parts. Still they remain unaware of their own bodies, of the realities of their surroundings, and even unaware of their own stupidity."

"Along with the scholars, they despise the mathematical sciences, which are the only true sources of information about those things which they claim to know so much about. Instead they talk about miracles and write about things that nobody could ever know, things that cannot be proven by any evidence in nature."

"It seems to me that all studies are vain and full of errors unless they are based on experience and can be tested by experiment, in other words, they can be demonstrated to our senses. For if we are doubtful of what our senses perceive then how much more doubtful should we be of things that our senses cannot perceive, like the nature of God and the soul and other such things over which there are endless disputes and controversies."

"Wherever there is no true science and no certainty of knowledge, there will be conflicting speculations and quarrels. However, whenever things are proven by scientific demonstration and known for certain, then all quarreling will cease. And if controversy should ever arise again, then our first conclusions must have been questionable."

Da Vinci did believe in a God, but probably was nothing resembling a orthodox Christian.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

And yet you have no retort. If this argument had that many holes, surely even you could have pointed them out but instead you resort to "This is stupid...just because."

Well, okay. I think I'll have a go, then...

Yeah it is important to have faith in something. Not to mention in my opinion I think it's rather arrogant to believe that there isn't a power greater than us, whether it's a spirit, God or something else and think that because it's not right in front of their faces, it must not exist.

Firstly, why would you think it's arrogant not to believe in something that you have no good reason to believe exists? Whether or not it is "greater" than us is irrelevant. That's like if I invent a magical genie who can drink more than you can, and you don't believe it, I tell you that I think it's "arrogant" for you to believe there isn't something that can drink more than you can. Do you see the flaw in logic?

Secondly, I've never seen anybody on these forums argue that just because we can't see something means it doesn't exist. The reasoning isn't "I can't see it, therefore it doesn't exist", it's "I have no good reason to believe it exists, therefore I cannot conclude that it exists."

You see germs all around us. Does it mean that they didn't exist until we invented a microscope? No, they always existed, but we needed a lense to see it.

Correct. But cast your mind back thousands of years and imagine being a caveman, hanging out with your caveman friend. Suddenly, your caveman friend turns to you and says "Y'know what? I believe that our bodies are covered in tiny organisms too small to see that can affect and inhabit our bodies and cause us to become ill if we allow them to proliferate too much, and we can be rid of them with a rigorous application of soapy water". When you ask your friend how he reached his conclusion, he tells you "I dunno. It's just a hunch I have". The question is: should you believe him?

The answer is: no. Even though everything he said was true, you still have no good reason to believe it, so you can justifiably dismiss it. If you had the capacity to investigate his claim, say, by designing and building the first molecular microscope, or measuring rates of decay, etc. you might have causes to accept what he has said as true. But until then, you have no good reason to believe what they have said. Science doesn't assume non-existence until we observe something - it simply says "I don't believe X is true until X is sufficiently demonstrated to be true beyond a reasonable doubt".

Atheists don't seem to put much effort into finding out if spirits exist, despite demanding irrefutable proof, such as maybe doing what believers do, such as rituals, meditations ect. Has it ever occurred to them that the Third Eye, is the "lense" they need to see spirits? Rather most of them say "Nope they don't exist because it doesn't say so in my text book."

Please give me a single example of any atheist, on this forum or anywhere else, who has said anything like that.

I don't feel as if I'm helpless without my faith, it just helps a lot. Having faith in something gives us hope.

If you need faith for hope, then I feel sorry for you.

Notice how strange it is that when some atheists have problems like when their relatives in the hospital, they start praying?

"Hey, notice how weird it is when people who are in desperate emotional need and are in an extremely vulnerable mental and emotional state that they tend to behave irrationally and seek solace any way they can"?

 

[Blastcat]

Conservative is not a word usually associated with me and I, in most instances, write "G-d."

I'm wondering if you call it "Yahweh" as well, sometimes, and if there is a difference in meaning?

 

[Theweirdtophat]

They generally aren't remembered for their accomplishments in magic and mysticism. That's because their various faiths never produced peanut butter oil or calculus.



What do you mean? So, I can assume that there is a sliver of truth, in Greek mythology?



So I take you believe in unicorns, fairys and alchemy as well? Or, is that still narrow??

No they aren't remembered for it, but it never occurs to any atheist as to why respected well known scientists took their time to study such things if there is no "proof" of magic or mysticism. It never strikes you as strange? Magic didn't produce peanut butter or calculus but by studying, perhaps it gave them a better understanding of the universe and opened doors that were previously closed? Perhaps that's why the great scientists were so great is because they understood magic as another way of looking at things and it expanded their horizons.

Yeah there is some truth in mythology and legends. Otherwise they wouldn't BE legendary in the first place. Legend doesn't mean false, it means legendary, as in it's rumored and debated and talked about for years and years. If it was all false, who would talk about it? How do you make up stuff like the Great Flood or cities like Sodom and Gomorrah disappearing all of a sudden? Sometimes really, there's more truth in legends than in history.

Who's to say such creatures didn't exist at one point in time or actually do exist but are somewhere else? We haven't checked every inch of the Earth, you know, and are still discovering new things.

 

[Jumi]

No they aren't remembered for it, but it never occurs to any atheist as to why respected well known scientists took their time to study such things if there is no "proof" of magic or mysticism. It never strikes you as strange?

Then again you would find people like me who find it interesting why they delved into these topics and has knowledge of them, though lacking belief.

Regarding "the arrogance(!) of atheists", I believe the universe is far greater than myself. We are tiny creatures, one of billions on a tiny planet in a tiny solar system in the peripheria of a huge galaxy among huge galaxies. Tell me again how I am arrogant to believe ourselves insignificant compared to this.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No they aren't remembered for it, but it never occurs to any atheist as to why respected well known scientists took their time to study such things if there is no "proof" of magic or mysticism.

It occurs to me. In fact, I've explained this multiple times in various threads. Please don't make unfounded assumptions about atheists based entirely on your ignorance of their position.

It never strikes you as strange?

Not really. The human brain is "wired" in such a way that we tend to seek our and identify patterns in nature, and we tend to view the Universe in a manner that is a reflection of ourselves. Also, the human brain tends to prefer simple explanations that are personally satisfying rather than seek out more complex and less satisfying answers. It's not difficult to understand where the notion of the supernatural would come from when you actually learn about and understand how the human brain works at a very basic level.

Magic didn't produce peanut butter or calculus but by studying, perhaps it gave them a better understanding of the universe and opened doors that were previously closed?

Then why has not a single one of them, or anyone else throughout all of history, ever demonstrated its existence?

Perhaps that's why the great scientists were so great is because they understood magic as another way of looking at things and it expanded their horizons.

And perhaps it's because they were all abducted by aliens who inserted the answers into their dreams.

Yeah there is some truth in mythology and legends. Otherwise they wouldn't BE legendary in the first place. Legend doesn't mean false, it means legendary, as in it's rumored and debated and talked about for years and years. If it was all false, who would talk about it? How do you make up stuff like the Great Flood or cities like Sodom and Gomorrah disappearing all of a sudden? Sometimes really, there's more truth in legends than in history.

Okay then. Please present one piece of evidence of the great flood or Sodom and Gamorrah.

People make up stories all the time.

Who's to say such creatures didn't exist at one point in time or actually do exist but are somewhere else? We haven't checked every inch of the Earth, you know, and are still discovering new things.

Which is exactly why we never assume something is true until we have good reasons to think it's true.

 

[dust1n]

No they aren't remembered for it, but it never occurs to any atheist as to why respected well known scientists took their time to study such things if there is no "proof" of magic or mysticism. It never strikes you as strange?

I'm aware of more scientists with various religious inclinations, then the 3 scientists you mentioned. Even Darwin believed in God.

Magic didn't produce peanut butter or calculus but by studying, perhaps it gave them a better understanding of the universe and opened doors that were previously closed? Perhaps that's why the great scientists were so great is because they understood magic as another way of looking at things and it expanded their horizons.

Right, well we could assume that to be the case, but then we would just be assuming, wouldn't we?

Yeah there is some truth in mythology and legends. Otherwise they wouldn't BE legendary in the first place. Legend doesn't mean false, it means legendary, as in it's rumored and debated and talked about for years and years. If it was all false, who would talk about it? How do you make up stuff like the Great Flood or cities like Sodom and Gomorrah disappearing all of a sudden? Sometimes really, there's more truth in legends than in history.

It's strange to me that you only hold this to be true for particularly Christian legends? What sliver of truth have you extracted about natural world for the Illiad, Muhammad's military expeditions and divine relevations. Presumably Sisyphus is still pushing a rock up a hill forever. Vishnu probably did reincarnate into Krishna. You can't make this stuff up? Why not?

Who's to say such creatures didn't exist at one point in time or actually do exist but are somewhere else? We haven't checked every inch of the Earth, you know, and are still discovering new things.

'Tis is true. It's always possible there is was a unicorn at some point the past, or that there may be unicorns on other planets. Simply not enough information.

 

[Theweirdtophat]

I'm aware of more scientists with various religious inclinations, then the 3 scientists you mentioned. Even Darwin believed in God.



Right, well we could assume that to be the case, but then we would just be assuming, wouldn't we?



It's strange to me that you only hold this to be true for particularly Christian legends? What sliver of truth have you extracted about natural world for the Illiad, Muhammad's military expeditions and divine relevations. Presumably Sisyphus is still pushing a rock up a hill forever. Vishnu probably did reincarnate into Krishna. You can't make this stuff up? Why not?



'Tis is true. It's always possible there is was a unicorn at some point the past, or that there may be unicorns on other planets. Simply not enough information.

The Great Flood isn't strictly a Christian thing. In fact there's actually a LOT of religions that have their flood myths, whether it's Abrahamic, Dharmic, Oriental or Pagan. There's a lot of stories that various myths of the world flooding, not all of them are the same but having a flood certainty isn't impossible. The Earth goes through changes through various periods in time and perhaps back then, ice melted and flooded or an absurd amount of rain happened or maybe a planet passed near Earth and the closeness of the planet upset the oceans and ice caps and caused much flooding. It would also explain why certain civilizations disappeared as well without a trace. Civilizations don't just disappear for no reason.

Legends have exaggerations but there is some truth to them and shouldn't always be dismissed as totally false.

 

[dust1n]

The Great Flood isn't strictly a Christian thing. In fact there's actually a LOT of religions that have their flood myths, whether it's Abrahamic, Dharmic, Oriental or Pagan. There's a lot of stories that various myths of the world flooding, not all of them are the same but having a flood certainty isn't impossible. The Earth goes through changes through various periods in time and perhaps back then, ice melted and flooded or an absurd amount of rain happened or maybe a planet passed near Earth and the closeness of the planet upset the oceans and ice caps and caused much flooding. It would also explain why certain civilizations disappeared as well without a trace. Civilizations don't just disappear for no reason.

There isn't enough water on the entire planet to flood the Earth. However, the overwhelming majority of ancient peoples built cities on Rivers. Euphrates, Yellow River, Nile, Amazon, etc. were flooding is mostly like to happen. All ancient people talk about was floods and famine because when farming on the side of a river, the chances of there being too much water or not enough water is enough to kill a whole village. Too much water kills people a lot faster.

Legends have exaggerations but there is some truth to them and shouldn't always be dismissed as totally false.

Okay, so what from the Iliad is there some truth to? I don't disagree that there isn't truth in legends, but we would we assume that the flood part of a flood myth. Maybe a guy named Noah survived a non-world wide flood. Maybe that's the truth in the legend.

 

[viole]

Then again you would find people like me who find it interesting why they delved into these topics and has knowledge of them, though lacking belief.

Regarding "the arrogance(!) of atheists", I believe the universe is far greater than myself. We are tiny creatures, one of billions on a tiny planet in a tiny solar system in the peripheria of a huge galaxy among huge galaxies. Tell me again how I am arrogant to believe ourselves insignificant compared to this.

Arrogance of atheists?

I wonder how believers, who think that the whole Universe has been created for a certain species of primates, can accuse anyone of arrogance.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Unification]

I don't think they rely on sex drugs and beer. They are still people and I know it's just my opinion but I always thought the atheist life sounded depressing. Not believing in a deity or spirits of anything, strictly focusing on science and materialism, not even believing in the afterlife or reincarnation and basically not believing in too many things unless there's total proof of it's existence. What do they look forward to when they pass on? Not even getting a chance to see their families again or the afterlife or reincarnate? Not all atheists are like that but quite a few are. It just seems narrow and depressing to me.

Some confined and limited in a closed box, in ways. As we usually all are in differing and our own ways. Not using the brain and mind's latent potential more in expansion.

 

[Shad]

Religious people have their God/gods to rely on. During difficult times they can seek help in mosque church synagogue or whatever, but atheists rely only on sex drugs alcohol for "spiritual comfort".

Depends on what type of help you are seeking. Often people will go to religious centers for help that requires professional help. This religious help does little to address the underlying problem. At times it is very harmful to both the individual and others around them. At best it is a short term placebo. If we are being honest here atheists do not need spiritual comfort since they do not believe in the spiritual. You are projecting parts of your ideology on to atheists then attempting to claim we use sex, drugs and alcohol to deal with your projection.

I do not drink. Yet many religions do not have restrictions on alcohol. So if any religious person has had even a beer in the last decade they need alcohol more than I do. I am very conservative regarding sex which is a combination of my former religion and life experiences. So I do not need sex. I only take prescription drugs for pain so I do not need drugs. So your OP is nothing more than a strawman based on projection and religious dogma dictating what people you do not know do and think. It is no better than me asking you "Have you stopped beating your wife/husband yet?" I am projecting an idea and characteristic you have based on nothing but my mind.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Religious people have their God/gods to rely on. During difficult times they can seek help in mosque church synagogue or whatever, but atheists rely only on sex drugs alcohol for "spiritual comfort".

As an atheist, I have no need for spiritual comfort. When times are difficult, I hunker down and figure it out for myself. I know not everyone is capable of dealing with problems on their own, and I understand why some people get addicted to drugs, sex, or gods. Some people just need escape and fantasy when times are tough - other people push through and solve the problem.

 

[Nakosis]

Religious people have their God/gods to rely on. During difficult times they can seek help in mosque church synagogue or whatever, but atheists rely only on sex drugs alcohol for "spiritual comfort".

Actually I have friends and family. Religious folks don't have God to rely on, they have other religions folks. Doesn't seem any real difference it's still people you are relying on.

Religious folks will mislead you are can stab you in the back just like any one else. It's just your perception that sees it different.