Present arguments for atheism

[SkepticThinker]

Interesting. I'll check it out.



Perhaps for you - and that's fine.

Perhaps you could share what kind of explanatory power you think filling in gaps in knowledge with "god did it" may have.

 

[HekaMa'atRa]

Perhaps you could share what kind of explanatory power you think filling in gaps in knowledge with "god did it" may have.

Well for starters you need to believe in the concept of god otherwise such ideas wouldn't hold any weight for you.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Well for starters you need to believe in the concept of god otherwise such ideas wouldn't hold any weight for you.

I think a person could at least consider or try to understand the concepts, without actually having to accept them.

 

[Iti oj]

I'm not a Christian, but most Christians/ or rather denominations of Xianity/, think that their Deity is the same as the one I adhere to, so your answer should /theoretically/ apply to most Biblical theists. Aside from that, you seemed to separate the 'mystic' deity from the Biblical Deity, and I asked why or what reasoning you have for that.

Mysticism just like theism is an extremely broad topic. I have seen mystics who follow monotheism, some pantheism others something even less defined than that.

The bible itself is an argument against god, but it would not apply to you unless you believe in the bible. Not every one even agrees on how the bible should be treat or interpreted or what its role is.

 

[HekaMa'atRa]

I think a person could at least consider or try to understand the concepts, without actually having to accept them.

I find it more fulfilling to have answers to the most mysterious questions in life rather than being left with a feeling of uncertainty. In order to believe "god did it" has explanatory power, you need to accept the concept of god as a reality.

 

[Iti oj]

That is semantics when considering theism as a concept, however..

No its not. It means that my decision is actually based upon thought.

The Biblical Deity is what makes the text 'theism', not various arguments that make the differences between various denominations and textual adherence. So, I don't think you really have an argument here. As a Biblical theist, yes ,that is a necessary position for my theism, so, if you are saying that that Deity does not exist, however, others might, then that is your argument. But you can't add groups of people who merely use the Bible as a means to promote some other type of beliefs, that is like saying that a vegetarian could mean anything, but it still means abstaining from meat. See how that doesn't work? You can't have any sort of conflicting definition for the same words or ideas. That is why Theism or Biblical Theism does not include certain types of religious ideas, or theistic ideas

No, a vegan has a very precise definition even then theirs still leeway.
No, not all "biblical theist" believe that the bible is the divine word of god or literal. there fore arguments against problems in the bible won't be arguments against god.

differing opinions on salvation, sin and the afterlife effect the logical cohesion, creates or removes contradictions.

And thats just dealing with one type of monotheism.

 

[Desert Snake]

No its not. It means that my decision is actually based upon thought.
No, a vegan has a very precise definition even then theirs still leeway.
No, not all "biblical theist" believe that the bible is the divine word of god or literal. there fore arguments against problems in the bible won't be arguments against god.

differing opinions on salvation, sin and the afterlife effect the logical cohesion, creates or removes contradictions.

And thats just dealing with one type of monotheism.

Ah, but you are conflating things that aren't Theism, with ''theism''. Theism is a specific belief, it doesn't have to include reference to any of those subjects your referring to. This is a common mistake, mixing up theism with 'religion', or religious ideas.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Because even with all our scientific knowledge we still cannot understand how life began nor can we replicate life using only basic non-living components from which life supposedly sprang from.

Ah - so just an argument from ignorance. Disappointing.

So...
- you don't understand life.
- you consider this a problem.
- therefore, you assume one or more gods.

Does this help you with your problem? Do you understand your god(s)?

 

[HekaMa'atRa]

Ah - so just an argument from ignorance. Disappointing.

I don't see it as ignorance if the knowledge is currently unobtainable or never will be. Can you be ignorant to the unknowable?

- you don't understand life.

We understand life as humanly as possible - or did you mean, 'you don't understand the origin of life," to which religion offers an answer.

- you consider this a problem.

No, I don't see it as a problem. Religion offers an answer.

- therefore, you assume one or more gods.

Do I believe the Divine is behind the origin of life? Yes.

 

[Cap'n MacDougal]

I've often thought something along those lines - that maybe the conditions and components for how life began can never be replicated. If that's the case, there will always be an argument for religion no mater how irrational it might seem.



Through the assistance of scientists, right? It's not like a sterile test tube (or even one filled with chemical compounds) suddenly developed cell membranes and self-replicating RNA without some kind of interaction. And even then, we might have a clue how these basic components formed but we don't have a clue what's behind the spark that makes something non-living to living. So until that's figured out, there will always be the argument, yes, god did it. And if you were ever to figure out how life began, the next step will be to figure out how to create matter from nothing.

Hello, HekaMa'atRa.

Correct. Theists, or individuals who subscribe to various religions, will always possess an argument in favor of their religion; even in the presence of defeaters. It's one of the fun immunization strategies which is prepackaged with self-validating belief systems. Personally, I find propositions such as "until science proves with certainty otherwise, my belief that (insert Deity) created the universe will hold" to be entertaining. It has been my experience that such individuals possess no explanation of the mechanism(s) by which the creative endeavor was accomplished. I suppose that an appeal to a Divine Metaphysical Puzzle glides across the palate better than a purely Physical Puzzle.

 

[viole]

I find it more fulfilling to have answers to the most mysterious questions in life rather than being left with a feeling of uncertainty. In order to believe "god did it" has explanatory power, you need to accept the concept of god as a reality.

I think you confuse causes with effects. I doubt people believe in God first and then find out that He answers their existential questions. i believe the contrary is true. They look for something that could possibly answer their existential questions and then, well, ... let there be light.

Ciao

- viole

 

[SkepticThinker]

I find it more fulfilling to have answers to the most mysterious questions in life rather than being left with a feeling of uncertainty. In order to believe "god did it" has explanatory power, you need to accept the concept of god as a reality.

I guess I'm failing to see how it's an actual answer. I feel like it's not really an answer at all and that you are just in the same boat as everyone else - we just don't know. I'd love to know everything too, but life just isn't like that.

I don't need to believe "god did it" in order to attempt to understand what kind of explanatory power such a concept is supposed to have. From where I sit, I don't see how it actually explains anything at all.

 

[Iti oj]

Ah, but you are conflating things that aren't Theism, with ''theism''. Theism is a specific belief, it doesn't have to include reference to any of those subjects your referring to. This is a common mistake, mixing up theism with 'religion', or religious ideas.

No theism is not a specific belief its a large collection of beliefs.

Your concept of God/gods/divine differs vastly from just say @Quintessence

No the context of understanding of the concept as well as the claims made about God stem from religion, you can't ignore it.

I have already answered you and you ignored it.

"there is no evidence for god, no need for god, and nothing suggest god"

^this^

as per my more detailed points I can range anywhere from agnostic, soft atheist to hard atheist depending on the claims and supporting "evidence"

as I said earlier, which you ignored, I am agnostic about a god(at least soft atheist) but im an atheist(up to hard atheism) about your god.

 

[Nietzsche]

They will be the same as for a-fairism, a-bigfootism, a-leprechaunism, etc. And you know them already, if you do not believe in fairies, etc.

Ciao

- viole

Hey! Leprechauns are real! It's just considered rude to call dwarf Irishman with a drinking problem(this feels redundant after Irishman, granted) a leprechaun now.

 

[Desert Snake]

No theism is not a specific belief its a large collection of beliefs.

Your concept of God/gods/divine differs vastly from just say @Quintessence

No the context of understanding of the concept as well as the claims made about God stem from religion, you can't ignore it.

I have already answered you and you ignored it.

"there is no evidence for god, no need for god, and nothing suggest god"

^this^

as per my more detailed points I can range anywhere from agnostic, soft atheist to hard atheist depending on the claims and supporting "evidence"

as I said earlier, which you ignored, I am agnostic about a god(at least soft atheist) but im an atheist(up to hard atheism) about your god.

Actually you 'said that' with a hodge podge of ideas, /hence the mystic question/, and you wrote ''Christian god'', which, although I don't know what that is, I assume you meant the same as the Deity I adhere to,/ the Biblical Deity. You weren't as clear as you think.

 

[HekaMa'atRa]

Hello @Cap'n MacDougal,

Personally, I find propositions such as "until science proves with certainty otherwise, my belief that (insert Deity) created the universe will hold" to be entertaining.

I hope my statement did not create the assumption that my belief in the Divine will diminish if we find the origins of life itself. As I said before, I see no problem with believing science can explain how the universe works but was developed by a supernatural force.

It has been my experience that such individuals possess no explanation of the mechanism(s) by which the creative endeavor was accomplished.

For the most part, religious explanations that I believe and come across follows along the lines of Divine Will. And with Kemetics, Divine Intelligence, Divine Energy, and Divine Utterance. Religion offers explanations much like science offers hypotheses. Neither can currently be proven.

I think you confuse causes with effects. I doubt people believe in God first and then find out that He answers their existential questions. i believe the contrary is true. They look for something that answers their existential questions and then, well, let there be light.

I kind of agree with what you're saying if I understood you correctly. I personally believe all religions are manmade and are simply interpretations of the Divine. Each culture/person has a different interpretation and we choose the one that speaks to us. For some, they hear nothing or feel there's nothing to be interpreted.

I'm saying I feel like it's not really an answer at all and that you are actually just in the same boat as everyone else - we just don't know.

Well yes, we are in the same boat because we cannot know for sure nor can it be proven. It's how we feel and think of things while in the boat that separates us.

I don't need to believe "god did it" in order to attempt to understand what kind of explanatory power such a concept is supposed to have. From where I sit, I don't see how it actually explains anything at all.

The weight it holds as explanatory power is completely subjective. If you believe in god, it's a heavy load. If you don't, it doesn't weigh anything at all. I know where you sit, I can't change your seat, and you are perfectly allowed to sit wherever you like

 

[viole]

Hey! Leprechauns are real! It's just considered rude to call dwarf Irishman with a drinking problem(this feels redundant after Irishman, granted) a leprechaun now.

Allright.

Do you think they can become über-leprechauns?



Ciao

- viole

 

[Iti oj]

Actually you 'said that' with a hodge podge of ideas, /hence the mystic question/, and you wrote ''Christian god'', which, although I don't know what that is, I assume you meant the same as the Deity I adhere to,/ the Biblical Deity. You weren't as clear as you think.

Ahh still ignoring my points.

 

[Desert Snake]

Ahh still ignoring my points.

The general reasons you gave are merely subjective. They may convince you , but they don't convince me.

 

[Iti oj]

The general reasons you gave are merely subjective. They may convince you , but they don't convince me.

I'm not here to convince you, just answer your question and help you get some insight and explore some of my own ideas as well as expand on them from what I have learned here.