Playing the Atheist's advocate

[outhouse]

Believing is a matter of faith and faith can not be proved or disproved.

It can be disproved. But we do not have to. The burden is on the faithful.

Remember there is a reason the men who wrote the books used a faith based concept and placed all rewards after death.

Also remember, faith is not a safety net that keeps reality out.

 

[RedDragon94]

Depends on how one regards "know." For some people the validity of one's perception involves no more than imputing certainty to the merest of evidence: "I know god exists because X says he does," or perhaps more honestly, "I know god exists because I need him to." For others, knowledge involves more exacting evidence: "I know god exists because logic demands it," or "I know god exists because I had a supernatural experience where I felt a presence I can only describe as god." So how you know god exists depends on the kind of evidence you're willing to accept.

Right, and I think that experience is the most legitimate evidence, I thought I heard that atheists don't accept experience as evidence though.

 

[RedDragon94]

My logic does not allow, creation being uncreated.

Neither does mine really. After all, someone had to design the process of evolution in order for there to be such precise results that there are. Every process has oversight.

 

[RedDragon94]

Surveys routinely find atheists and agnostics know more about religion than the religious.
Atheists, agnostics most knowledgeable about religion, survey says - latimes

I think I saw something on CNN about that.

 

[RedDragon94]

I have no preconceptions.

I applaud you for that. That's the way we all should be.

It only runs in to conflict with a very specific reading of a very specific text.

I take it you mean literalists?

 

[outhouse]

After all, someone had to design the process of evolution

No, nature needs no designer.

 

[RedDragon94]

That question answers itself. You can't. Or more to the point, why "serve" one? Why not just be a decent person to everyone, regardless of ethnicity, gender or orientation? If there is a god, and it's worth reverence, this quality will please it.

Wouldn't it be fun to come together with other people just to celebrate what God has done and allowed you to do in life? That's what religious ritual is in my mind, celebration of life.

 

[RedDragon94]

No, nature needs no designer.

So it's natural for things to just happen?

 

[Skwim]

Right, and I think that experience is the most legitimate evidence, I thought I heard that atheists don't accept experience as evidence though.

Not of gods. If they did they wouldn't remain atheists.

 

[Marisa]

Wouldn't it be fun to come together with other people just to celebrate what God has done and allowed you to do in life? That's what religious ritual is in my mind, celebration of life.

I don't think so, no. I accomplish what I accomplish and frankly it's far more motivating to recognize that I do it because it's important to me and possibly others than because some deity "wrote it on my heart". You don't need gods to celebrate life.

 

[Marisa]

Right, and I think that experience is the most legitimate evidence, I thought I heard that atheists don't accept experience as evidence though.

Not true. We believe you believe you've had an experience significant enough to convince you. We have not. And obviously unless we suddenly develop the ability to crawl into your head and experience your experiences, we can't confirm them.

 

[Desert Snake]

Right, and I think that experience is the most legitimate evidence, I thought I heard that atheists don't accept experience as evidence though.

I don't necessarily accept peoples ''experiences'', of anything; do you?

 

[Curious George]

Perhaps the Tao Te Ching. But it is kind of a toss-up. It is certainly the most impressive scripture I remember ever seeing.

I always thought the I ching was more of a "toss-up."

 

[LuisDantas]

I think that the belief in God might explain the origin of moral virtue to some people, to others moral virtue is seen as an innate quality of man.

(Btw, I have been meditating lately. I really enjoy concentration meditation, I might try mindfulness if I ever want to relax.)

I think it is all but completely self-evident that belief is not the origin of morality. Morality is a practical skill, one that arises out of the existence of both moral needs and sentience.

 

[LuisDantas]

Right, and I think that experience is the most legitimate evidence, I thought I heard that atheists don't accept experience as evidence though.

Some experiences are inherently only meaningful on a personal basis, and in that sense can never be proof of the existence of something on a wider scope.

I don't know for sure if that is what you mean, though.

 

[LuisDantas]

Neither does mine really. After all, someone had to design the process of evolution in order for there to be such precise results that there are. Every process has oversight.

I don't think so. Quite a lot of processes do in fact occur naturally with no evidence or even hint of any oversight.

Were I inclined to assume a creator (and I do think it is ultimately a matter of personal inclination), I would probably see the Normal Distribution as more of an evidence of a creator than I see existence itself, let alone biological evolution or the arising of life forms.

 

[LuisDantas]

Wouldn't it be fun to come together with other people just to celebrate what God has done and allowed you to do in life? That's what religious ritual is in my mind, celebration of life.

That is fair and good. I wish people were a tad more honest about how much of their conceptions of deities is of their own responsibility, though.

 

[LuisDantas]

So it's natural for things to just happen?

Yes. Do you think electromagnetism shows evidence of design or of intent?

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Right, and I think that experience is the most legitimate evidence, I thought I heard that atheists don't accept experience as evidence though.

I think religious experience is filtered culturally, and experiences tend to be decoded along specific religious beliefs, so it's hard to accept someone's else's at face value. A Hindu isn't going to see Jesus, and a Christian isn't going to see Vishnu, for example.

I applaud you for that. That's the way we all should be.

Thank you! But I want to add that I do have plenty of preconceptions like anyone, so I don't want to be disegenuous. But as an atheist, I don't have any specific preconceptions about the nature of a God(s) that would inform my interpretations of a personal religious experience.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

So in Christianity really the emotions and obedience are what legitimize your religious experience? I guess one can also look to the prophecies that Christ fulfilled, if one is willing to.

Not everyone abrahamic believe christ fulfilled prophecies. If it were a fact He fulfilled prophecies, people will know and can choose whether they want to follow Him. Since its based on hope, it depends on personal preference, emotions, and experiences. I havnt read any prophecies Christ fulfilled...only events that christians (as well as Jews and Muslims) atribute to Gods will.