*[I believe] Atheism is an absurd worldview

[Milton Platt]

I understand. People are ok with a world instead of no world. You get it. Right? How hard is it then to be ok with something instead of nothing?

I would be equally okay with either. If there was nothing, then I would not exist (because I am something) and therefore it would not matter.

 

[leibowde84]

For an hilarious account of the absurdity of atheism (at least, as it is represented in this forum), read The Atheist Who Didn't Exist: Or the Dreadful Consequences of Bad Arguments, by Andy Bannister. Be sure to read the footnotes, too.

How is atheism represented in this forum, in your opinion? I've seen so many varieties of atheistic belief, I feel like it's absurd to classify it in the way you have.

 

[skl]

I appreciate that you noticed my post.
I think you will agree that the gods exist in the mind of the believer. So when the person dies, his god dies with him. My god? Do you mean the God in which I put my trust? The God I trust does not die.

I believe there has always been something. I think it is not logical to think that all we have came from nothing. So there was something. If ever the universe becomes nothing again there will be something left. That something is GOD.

I appreciate your post, interesting topic. Yes, I agree the mind of a believer is the only place religious belief can exist because nothing can prove that the Christian God or any other has existed in any other form such as human or any life form of any description.

We will all die just as any animal on this planet. After time nothing of us will exist except in the memories of those who are still living.

The feeling “there has always been something” is normal, however the scientific evidence wins every time because we have evidence to support many aspects of human development and behaviour only discovered within the last 150 years. The argument “something from nothing” exactly describes a god without evidence of his existence and then creating the first humans from dust and a human rib. The theory that the delivery of the elements required to start life by a meteorite impacting on Earth has much more credibility.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I've seen so many varieties of atheistic belief, I feel like it's absurd to classify it in the way you have.

Indeed it is, and as we've discussed before atheism isn't a world view anyway. Of course there are many varieties of theistic belief too.

 

[skl]

How is atheism represented in this forum, in your opinion? I've seen so many varieties of atheistic belief, I feel like it's absurd to classify it in the way you have.

In my opinion, Ignorance is the default position we are born with, and so we must start life as an atheist considering we may not even know that gods have been created by man for many years of our life, therefore, atheism cannot or is not a belief system of any kind because it is natural and does not have to be learned. The inability to acknowledge that gods are any more than something like comic book heroes such as in my case means I am still in the default position.

If gods had not been invented by man atheism would not exist. Religious people often believe religious belief is natural and some believe we are born to worship a god. Of course to atheists this is absolute rubbish and confirmed by this informative documentary of religious origins.

 

[savagewind]

The publisher of the video is two minded imo. Good video. Listen to his voice when he first switches to talking about Jesus. CONDENSENDING
Lovely! Then he says (at least twice) that the Hebrews "plagiarized" the former stories. BUT he says the information for the stories comes from nature.
Whose story did they "plagiarize"? I think of instances where more than one inventor thinks up a similar design. Who's is plagiarizing who?
I think it is too bad that people are so very stuck up. It is amazing information (in the video) but the people dishing it out seem to me to be........(can't say it).

Also,@ski says that people are not born with a knowledge of God. I disagree. People are born knowing that care is there if we just ask for it.

I think there is a difference between truth and history. Some people, it seems, only consider real history true. But myth can be true and is true.

ps. I am Pisces. LOL. I never knew that about Pisces and Aquarius. It was interesting.

 

[skl]

The publisher of the video is two minded imo. Good video. Listen to his voice when he first switches to talking about Jesus. CONDENSENDING
Lovely! Then he says (at least twice) that the Hebrews "plagiarized" the former stories. BUT he says the information for the stories comes from nature.
Whose story did they "plagiarize"? I think of instances where more than one inventor thinks up a similar design. Who's is plagiarizing who?
I think it is too bad that people are so very stuck up. It is amazing information (in the video) but the people dishing it out seem to me to be........(can't say it).

Also,@ski says that people are not born with a knowledge of God. I disagree. People are born knowing that care is there if we just ask for it.

I think there is a difference between truth and history. Some people, it seems, only consider real history true. But myth can be true and is true.

ps. I am Pisces. LOL. I never knew that about Pisces and Aquarius. It was interesting.

You seem to find what you claim to be the condescending tone of voice that the narrator uses to be of importance. I suggest you were in the wrong state of mind at the time you watched this.

As the video pointed out the first gods were inspired by nature and the sun was the prime motivator because it is the most powerful and life giving force we have. The writers of the Bible obviously must have plagiarised the stories from the Egyptians considering almost every other religion has done the same since the Egyptian God Horus 3000 BC. Did you not really understand how many religions and gods copied the exact same stories? The Christian God’s resemblance to many other gods especially of the Egyptian God Horus is beyond remarkable and could never be a coincidence as you would like to believe.

FYI A new born baby looks to the mother for security of life definitely not a god.

Your beliefs support what you have admitted, that you would rather believe in the myth; therefore, I am sorry for you but I am glad you at least understand more about your star sign.

 

[Darkstorn]

*[I believe]The atheistic worldview is an absurd one. Why? Because *[I believe] the atheist views the world as ultimately meaningless and therefore as absurd.


*[bracketed red text = staff edit]

Why do you need meaning? Can't you accept that you are and that you are responsible for whatever you do, and it shouldn't be about a reward? Such as heaven, or a better next life.

Further more: Why is belief in god the only possible "meaning?". I mean, you imply this by saying that atheists specifically find the world meaningless, as if theists suddenly have meaning because they are theists. THAT is absurd. And circular reasoning. Why don't atheists have meaning in their world just because they are atheists?

Meaning from god is a construct: The same type of construct as if i would *choose* the meaning for my life. And i can. I can choose a meaning: To live in accordance to the laws of nature, without causing needless suffering to others, and in fact, i try to help whenever someone needs help and i can. You find the world meaningless without god. I find the world meaningless if i don't live like i just stated.

So: You're just wrong.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

In my opinion, Ignorance is the default position we are born with, and so we must start life as an atheist considering we may not even know that gods have been created by man for many years of our life, therefore, atheism cannot or is not a belief system of any kind because it is natural and does not have to be learned. The inability to acknowledge that gods are any more than something like comic book heroes such as in my case means I am still in the default position.

If gods had not been invented by man atheism would not exist. Religious people often believe religious belief is natural and some believe we are born to worship a god. Of course to atheists this is absolute rubbish and confirmed by this informative documentary of religious origins.

Oh man, I thought we were beyond the Zeitgeist movie by now. Even as an atheist this movie with its lack of scholarship bugs me. It tries too hard to Hero With a Thousand Faces tie up religions with a neat little bow, ignores contradiction and even fabricates resemblance(or, at least, imports fabrication from Archaya and the astounding lack of further citation). For example there is no actual account of Horus's purported 12 decouples, wise men, baptism et all. And rumors of 'virgin birth' is taken from Isis throwing away her husband Osiris' penis, neglecting that she fashioned him a new one and humped him to conceive Horus.
Further, because it uses such narrow sources, and very little first hand accounting, it completely leaves out other more probable mythological origins like older Sumerian cultures and yes, even some original myths to the region.
It's basically a lazy parse of the discussion.
This particular reupload of Zeitgeist also amusingly leaves out the rest of the movie which goes on to insist 9/11 was a government inside job with the same Loose Change style arguments that have been roundly debunked. So that's the kind of people you're dealing with when addressing the makers of this movie.

 

[savagewind]

You seem to find what you claim to be the condescending tone of voice that the narrator uses to be of importance.

It isn't important to the way I understand. It is very important to the way I respect or not the person speaking.

I suggest you were in the wrong state of mind at the time you watched this.

Do you think I imagined his tone of voice change?

As the video pointed out the first gods were inspired by nature and the sun was the prime motivator because it is the most powerful and life giving force we have.

The video says the world has many such fables that are similar. I think they all were inspired by the sun and the stars and not like you say copied from other people's imaginings.

The first time people experience the real phenomenon The writers of the Bible obviously must have plagiarized the stories from the Egyptians

You think it is "obvious". How did the other similar stories evolve? Plagiarized also, according to you?

thatconsidering almost every other religion has done the same since the Egyptian God Horus 3000 BC. Did you not really understand how many religions and gods copied the exact same stories?

On different continents?

The Christian God’s resemblance to many other gods especially of the Egyptian God Horus is beyond remarkable and could never be a coincidence as you would like to believe.

It is definitely not coincidence. Most or all of the stories were inspired by "real phenomenon".

FYI A new born baby looks to the mother for security of life definitely not a god.

LOL Really? An abandoned baby is thinking of its mother? I think not. It is thinking about being cold, alone, uncomfortable and hungry. Most babies will be ok if anyone coddled them imo.

Your beliefs support what you have admitted, that you would rather believe in the myth; therefore, I am sorry for you but I am glad you at least understand more about your star sign.

You probably should listen to yourself. Oh, there's an idea. I believe the phenomenon which inspired the myths is REAL. I never once said I believe in the myths. I wonder why you think so?

 

[skl]

Oh man, I thought we were beyond the Zeitgeist movie by now. Even as an atheist this movie with its lack of scholarship bugs me. It tries too hard to Hero With a Thousand Faces tie up religions with a neat little bow, ignores contradiction and even fabricates resemblance(or, at least, imports fabrication from Archaya and the astounding lack of further citation). For example there is no actual account of Horus's purported 12 decouples, wise men, baptism et all. And rumors of 'virgin birth' is taken from Isis throwing away her husband Osiris' penis, neglecting that she fashioned him a new one and humped him to conceive Horus.
Further, because it uses such narrow sources, and very little first hand accounting, it completely leaves out other more probable mythological origins like older Sumerian cultures and yes, even some original myths to the region.
It's basically a lazy parse of the discussion.
This particular reupload of Zeitgeist also amusingly leaves out the rest of the movie which goes on to insist 9/11 was a government inside job with the same Loose Change style arguments that have been roundly debunked. So that's the kind of people you're dealing with when addressing the makers of this movie.

I do not intend to endorse a video from you tube made by someone I know nothing about “as gospel”. The idea is to throw it into the ring where all sorts of good and bad ideas along with the crap that gets thrown around. Regardless of its origins it does reveal many common and basic factual aspects that may cause some controversial debate as it has done and offer challenges to believers who have complete faith in a man made god from thousands of years ago, therefore it may achieve something.

Your claim that it uses such narrow sources, and very little first-hand accounting may be true, however that statement is patently true of the scriptures used by many of today’s religions and many historical events that surround these issues. As far as the 9/11 issue I have no knowledge regarding this video.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

How is atheism represented in this forum, in your opinion? I've seen so many varieties of atheistic belief, I feel like it's absurd to classify it in the way you have.

Well technically atheism is only lack of god belief, and doesn't pertain to anything else an atheist may think or believe. Ergo there are atheist pagans and atheist Buddhists who believe more seriously in ideas like rebirth.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I do not intend to endorse a video from you tube made by someone I know nothing about “as gospel”. The idea is to throw it into the ring where all sorts of good and bad ideas along with the crap that gets thrown around. Regardless of its origins it does reveal many common and basic factual aspects that may cause some controversial debate as it has done and offer challenges to believers who have complete faith in a man made god from thousands of years ago, therefore it may achieve something.

Your claim that it uses such narrow sources, and very little first-hand accounting may be true, however that statement is patently true of the scriptures used by many of today’s religions and many historical events that surround these issues. As far as the 9/11 issue I have no knowledge regarding this video.

My issue is the 'many common and basic factual aspects' is given to a lot of false equivalency in this video based on actual scholarship. And while that is definitely true with the many and contradicting scriptural scholarship, two wrongs don't make a right. I could make a longer list linking Star Wars plagiarizing of Dune or Lord of the Rings plagiarizing of Wagners Ring Cycle of you'll forgive the nerdy reference, than Jesus to Horus or Jesus to Mithra when told honestly.
Mithra is a big one too, even though the two myths commonalities where they developed, did at the same time and not one before the other. And, again, some similarities presented are outright false. Mithra emerging, fully adult, from a slab of rock can't honestly be called a 'virgin birth.'

I harp on Zeitgeist because it used to be an especially prevalent piece of crap. But my indignation is more towards the general misrepresentation of other culture's myths to redress bible stories, which is an all too common debate.
I've got lots to say about the same sort of not-really-accurate finger pointing towards Christian holidays having 'pagan origins.' But that's a topic for another day.

 

[skl]

It isn't important to the way I understand. It is very important to the way I respect or not the person speaking. Do you think I imagined his tone of voice change?

The video says the world has many such fables that are similar. I think they all were inspired by the sun and the stars and not like you say copied from other people's imaginings.You think it is "obvious". How did the other similar stories evolve? Plagiarized also, according to you?On different continents? It is definitely not coincidence. Most or all of the stories were inspired by "real phenomenon".

LOL Really? An abandoned baby is thinking of its mother? I think not. It is thinking about being cold, alone, uncomfortable and hungry. Most babies will be ok if anyone coddled them imo.

You probably should listen to yourself. Oh, there's an idea. I believe the phenomenon which inspired the myths is REAL. I never once said I believe in the myths. I wonder why you think so?

I do think it is important how you perceive the person talking, however this commentator used the same tone of voice throughout the whole video.

The sun, I said was the prominent motivator for the invention of gods. And true enough this comes down to imagination. This may be recorded as truth and told as factual events. The stories are passed on to others who travelled in what was the “known world” and over time the stories were plagiarised or adapted in a similar context for the creation of other gods. This is a natural human phenomenon, all fables and myths have been created by someone and adapted to suit the story teller’s aspirations exactly the same way as the Biblical stories were adapted to suit Christianity.

Babies will as you say will be ok if coddled by anyone, but the coddler does become a surrogate mother figure if you want to split hairs. I thought you were originally disagreeing that babies were born with ignorance of a god.

I do believe this is your statement “I think there is a difference between truth and history. Some people, it seems, only consider real history true. But myth can be true and is true.” This is very confusing if you did not mean myths are real events.

 

[savagewind]

I do think it is important how you perceive the person talking, however this commentator used the same tone of voice throughout the whole video.

The sun, I said was the prominent motivator for the invention of gods. And true enough this comes down to imagination. This may be recorded as truth and told as factual events. The stories are passed on to others who travelled in what was the “known world” and over time the stories were plagiarised or adapted in a similar context for the creation of other gods. This is a natural human phenomenon, all fables and myths have been created by someone and adapted to suit the story teller’s aspirations exactly the same way as the Biblical stories were adapted to suit Christianity.

Babies will as you say will be ok if coddled by anyone, but the coddler does become a surrogate mother figure if you want to split hairs. I thought you were originally disagreeing that babies were born with ignorance of a god.

I do believe this is your statement “I think there is a difference between truth and history. Some people, it seems, only consider real history true. But myth can be true and is true.” This is very confusing if you did not mean myths are real events.

Myths are not real events, but the stories are like math equations. Mathematics is a language of something real. Myths are a language of something real.

 

[skl]

My issue is the 'many common and basic factual aspects' is given to a lot of false equivalency in this video based on actual scholarship. And while that is definitely true with the many and contradicting scriptural scholarship, two wrongs don't make a right. I could make a longer list linking Star Wars plagiarizing of Dune or Lord of the Rings plagiarizing of Wagners Ring Cycle of you'll forgive the nerdy reference, than Jesus to Horus or Jesus to Mithra when told honestly.
Mithra is a big one too, even though the two myths commonalities where they developed, did at the same time and not one before the other. And, again, some similarities presented are outright false. Mithra emerging, fully adult, from a slab of rock can't honestly be called a 'virgin birth.'

I harp on Zeitgeist because it used to be an especially prevalent piece of crap. But my indignation is more towards the general misrepresentation of other culture's myths to redress bible stories, which is an all too common debate.
I've got lots to say about the same sort of not-really-accurate finger pointing towards Christian holidays having 'pagan origins.' But that's a topic for another day.

I understand this issue comes down to comparative mythology. A controversial topic with claims from both sides, fragile evidence and the arguments for and against equally not adding any significance to the issues.

Granted the video is speculative and you are correct that a wrong does not make a right, however when you are arguing with people who believe in a concept that is based solely on faith and speculation in ancient scriptures with nothing of any significance to offer as evidence what else can you offer to incite them to challenge their beliefs? In this context I might argue the video has some real facts and a lot of shock content to offer.

 

[skl]

Myths are not real events, but the stories are like math equations. Mathematics is a language of something real. Myths are a language of something real.

Maths can explain many things in our world, but myths are exactly just that, a myth. These are generated by man, from man’s most powerful and emotional brain and are not reality. If you are meaning they have some truth attached to them but the truth cannot be established, it will remain a myth.

 

[savagewind]

I do think it is important how you perceive the person talking, however this commentator used the same tone of voice throughout the whole video.

I listened again and I must disagree. Compare stop 300-324... (and any other god's description that you want) with stop 540-544. Is it my imagination?

 

[savagewind]

If you are meaning they have some truth attached to them but the truth cannot be established, it will remain a myth.

You might want to edit this sentence. What does it mean?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I understand this issue comes down to comparative mythology. A controversial topic with claims from both sides, fragile evidence and the arguments for and against equally not adding any significance to the issues.

Granted the video is speculative and you are correct that a wrong does not make a right, however when you are arguing with people who believe in a concept that is based solely on faith and speculation in ancient scriptures with nothing of any significance to offer as evidence what else can you offer to incite them to challenge their beliefs? In this context I might argue the video has some real facts and a lot of shock content to offer.

I'd rather incite them with something true than trick them into doubt with bad reporting though. It's not that this movie is speculative. It's bad, making easily and obviously untrue statements about ancient cultures with the intent to call out Christians. There's plenty of Campbell-esque Monomyth discussions to be had without making dubious accusations about their faith. Does more damage in the long run, I think.