Atheism is "cool"

Húrin

velocirafter wrote: »

well there is some evidence but its pretty thin on the ground. Religious text are the main one and they are pretty easy to discredit. Other than its all personal accounts that cant be substantiated and anecdotal evidence, which isn't evidence its an anecdote. Is there something else major that I'm not thinking of?

Christians for the most part know that the Bible is unlikely to convince anyone that God exists. It was written by and for people who agree that God exists. For me personally, some of the strongest evidence is the existence of a moral conscience (that is distinct from instincts) that seems to vary little across all human cultures.

There is little point in me typing much here. Check out the Christianity forum for a lot of this sort of thing.

Non-scriptural arguments from Wikipedia:

The cosmological argument argues that there was a "first cause", or "prime mover" who is identified as God. It starts with some claim about the world, like its containing entities that are caused to exist by other entities.
The teleological argument argues that the universe's order and complexity are best explained by reference to a creator god. It starts with a rather more complicated claim about the world, i.e. that it exhibits order and design.

The ontological argument is based on arguments about a "being greater than which can not be conceived". It starts simply with a concept of God. Alvin Plantinga formulates this argument to show that if it is logically possible for God (a necessary being) to exist, then God exists.[17]

The mind-body problem argument suggests that the relation of consciousness to materiality is best understood in terms of the existence of God.

Arguments that some non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as justice, beauty, love or religious experience are arguments for theism as against materialism.

The anthropic argument suggests that basic facts, such as our existence, are best explained by the existence of God.

The moral argument (or axiological argument) argues that the existence of objective morality depends on the existence of God.

The transcendental argument suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other things we take seriously do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency.

The will to believe doctrine was pragmatist philosopher William James' attempt to prove God by showing that the adoption of theism as a hypothesis "works" in a believer's life. This doctrine depended heavily on James' pragmatic theory of truth where beliefs are proven by how they work when adopted rather than by proofs before they are believed (a form of the hypothetico-deductive method).

The above are not explained. If Youtube is your thing, have a look at this man's videos. Don't worry he's not an evangelist! He explains the above and many other arguments quite well.

velocirafter

While I fundamentally disagree with a lot of those argument, which is probably what you were talking about in the first place and which I suspect is the impenetrable difference between atheistic and religious thought processes, they only thing those arguments allow for is a creator that set up the universe and let it take off, there is nothing to suggest that this creator plays an active role in our day to day lives or that we are in a sort of waiting room for an afterlife.

MackDeToaster

Húrin wrote: »

For me personally, some of the strongest evidence is the existence of a moral conscience (that is distinct from instincts) that seems to vary little across all human cultures.

Please define for me this 'moral conscience which varies little' and provide some evidence of it ?

philologos

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

From reading a few of your posts, do you just contradict what people say, just to cause a debate?

Not really, most Christians would argue that there is circumstantial evidence for God, and that God is very much present in our lives and in the world today. Even if it was to start a debate, it's a debate that probably needs to be had, if we are going to have two different sets of people one claiming that there is no circumstantial evidence for God, and the other claiming that there is. Surely it's worthy of discussion to get to the crux of the issue. Or do you just expect us to accept the atheist position and go on our merry dismal way (after rejecting Christianity)?

Jakkass

Jakkass wrote: »

Not really, most Christians would argue that there is circumstantial evidence for God, and that God is very much present in our lives and in the world today. Even if it was to start a debate, it's a debate that probably needs to be had, if we are going to have two different sets of people one claiming that there is no circumstantial evidence for God, and the other claiming that there is. Surely it's worthy of discussion to get to the crux of the issue. Or do you just expect us to accept the atheist position and go on our merry dismal way (after rejecting Christianity)?

I said that to Hurin as a joke, I didn't mean it as it sounds. I'm all for starting debates!

Dades

Jakkass wrote: »

Surely it's worthy of discussion to get to the crux of the issue. Or do you just expect us to accept the atheist position and go on our merry dismal way (after rejecting Christianity)?

That would be one mighty thread!

A lot of ground rules would have to be set out. There's a huge difference between purported circumstantial evidence for a "god" (or "instigator") and evidence for the Abrahamic God, for example.

pH

Dades wrote: »

That would be one mighty thread!

A lot of ground rules would have to be set out. There's a huge difference between purported circumstantial evidence for a "god" (or "instigator") and evidence for the Abrahamic God, for example.

Oh that we could get that far! The last time we tried I'm sure we didn't get past what the word "evidence" meant!

Handsome Bob

Galvasean wrote: »

When I was in school (5 years ago) it was still relatively taboo to be an 'out' atheist. Usually if you said so you'd have to explain to people why ("How can you not believe in ANY kind of God?") which I wasn't bothered doing every couple of days. It was much easier to be an 'agnostic', although looking back that just makes you look like a fence sitter.

Fence sitter? There's nothing wrong with taking a step back and looking at both arguments without bias. I've heard it thrown at me plenty of times when discussing the social impact of religion. People can't seem to open their mind and understand how on one hand I don't believe, but on the other hand how I can see the positive (as well as the negative) impacts religion has had on society. Fence sitter? I've only been called that by outspoken clowns (that's not directed at you Galva).

As far as the thread goes, I think in today's society religion is increasingly at odds with the values of our youths. It could be argued that society is becoming more tolerant of "difference" in society while, take Christianity for example, is refusing to make any concessions in order to make their beliefs more in line with the modern society. As a result, young people are finding much harder to relate to organised religion and turn away. In today's societal pressures, it would take a teenager of huge mental strength to have strong religious convictions.

sukikettle

What if God exists and so too the promise of heaven and the very gruesome eternal hell.We can all die at any moment. Are you willing to enter into something catastrophic beyond human comprehension to hold onto your views and disbelief due to 'lack of eveidence'

MackDeToaster

sukikettle wrote: »

What if God exists and so too the promise of heaven and the very gruesome eternal hell.We can all die at any moment. Are you willing to enter into something catastrophic beyond human comprehension to hold onto your views and disbelief due to 'lack of eveidence'

Ah, Pascals wager. Which god would this be then, need I guess ?

sukikettle

We live in a 3D world what if His world was 10 dimensional, therefore all around you but you cannot see Him. Surely you know if you were to dip your finger into a 2 dimensional world all the 2 dimensional person would see is a circle. Have you truely explored what's at stake if this theory like a lot of evolution is ... is correct

pH

sukikettle wrote: »

What if God exists and so too the promise of heaven and the very gruesome eternal hell.We can all die at any moment. Are you willing to enter into something catastrophic beyond human comprehension to hold onto your views and disbelief due to 'lack of eveidence'

What if God exists and so too the promise of heaven and the very gruesome eternal hell (But Mohammed was right - eating pork is a terrible sin).We can all die at any moment. Are you willing to enter into something catastrophic beyond human comprehension to hold onto your bacon sandwiches* due to 'lack of evidence'?

* Bacon Sandwiches are a metaphor for any of the countless thousands of things that other religions say you need to do/not do in order to get to heaven and avoid eternal torment.

I worship Zeus for that very reason. What if he's real and you, in not believing in him, risk spending eternity in damnation?

And beside the point, worshipping God for that reason is a little... Pathetic. Don't you think? I tiny bit cowardly?

velocirafter

sukikettle wrote: »

What if God exists and so too the promise of heaven and the very gruesome eternal hell.We can all die at any moment. Are you willing to enter into something catastrophic beyond human comprehension to hold onto your views and disbelief due to 'lack of eveidence'

I imagine that I will see you there if the only reason you practice religion is in case you get screwed over after you die, I assume an omnisicient god would be able to see through your selfish motives.

If I am wrong then I would hope a deity would respect my logical approach to my convictions (obviously someone who could set up a universe must be an incredibly intelligent and logical person) and that I tried to be a good person for no other reason than to be good....so maybe i'll be waving down at you from heaven

sukikettle

To LZ5by5,
I think organised religion is poisonous for the youth. If they are searching for God, wouldn't they be better off engaging in a father/child meaningful relationship with Him, telling Him exactly what they find so difficult and where they feel challenged and then allowing Him the opportunity to respond. How many people have never done that instead hating God for everything humanity stands for and against thinking it was Him all the time. I don't believe you can be an aethiest during a relationship with Him. You either decide to skip knowing Him or fall out with Him because He actually by invitation starts to do something in your life to turn it around that you don't agree with. Surely there are things happening in your life that require a supernatural turn of events. Do you really not want His help. Are you really happy to go it so alone. Where is your joy and hope and your surety of more. Are you just grazing here waiting to die because you sort of just happened.

sukikettle

I don't follow God in case of hell. Hell is not a big stick He uses to beat up humanity. He has no alternative but to send you there if you reject Him because rejecting Him leaves only one alternative you are Satan's and to the awful abode created for him originally you will go. So your belief hell is a threat if you don't get with God is a bent lie. He has no choice when you reject yours

pH

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I worship Zeus for that very reason. What if he's real and you, in not believing in him, risk spending eternity in damnation?

I'm not sure Zeus promised all those who believed in him eternal salvation, but I like your thinking, worship everything - just in case, Pascal would be proud.

velocirafter

how can you have a relationship with someone you cant see and doesn't respond in any way other than extremely random and obscure ways that are open to interpretation. If i was getting emails from god it would be a different question!!

Handsome Bob

sukikettle wrote: »

To LZ5by5,
I think organised religion is poisonous for the youth. If they are searching for God, wouldn't they be better off engaging in a father/child meaningful relationship with Him, telling Him exactly what they find so difficult and where they feel challenged and then allowing Him the opportunity to respond. How many people have never done that instead hating God for everything humanity stands for and against thinking it was Him all the time.

Anyone who keeps an eye on my posts in these forums will know that I don't blame organised religion or your God for all he ills in this world. It is too much of a simplistic notion.

Secondly, when I did believe I always spoke to "God". I'd ask "Him" why the horrible things that I have experienced have happened in my life. I waited for an answer. I wanted an answer. I believed in an answer. Guess what? It never happened.

sukikettle wrote: »

I don't believe you can be an aethiest during a relationship with Him. You either decide to skip knowing Him or fall out with Him because He actually by invitation starts to do something in your life to turn it around that you don't agree with. Surely there are things happening in your life that require a supernatural turn of events. Do you really not want His help. Are you really happy to go it so alone. Where is your joy and hope and your surety of more. Are you just grazing here waiting to die because you sort of just happened.

I don't need God. All you have to do is love yourself and you'll be more than happy and will lead a very meaningful life.

pH

sukikettle wrote: »

I don't follow God in case of hell. Hell is not a big stick He uses to beat up humanity. He has no alternative but to send you there

Not much of a God then is he?

if you reject Him because rejecting Him leaves only one alternative you are Satan's and to the awful abode created for his demise only originally you will go. So your belief hell is a threat if you don't get with God is a bent lie. He has no choice when you reject yours

So if he created Hell just for Satan (as punishment) it's unlikely he'd send us there (cos Satan would enjoy torturing us). We're going some place not too bad, probably somewhere modelled on Lanzarote.

sHnaCk

I don't need God. All you have to do is love yourself and you'll be more than happy and will lead a very meaningful life.[/quote]

So you believe, it is just that you choose to reject eh? however, predestination comes into play which immidiately makes your rejection null and void. You cannot reject if you have not YET been chosen; because it is His will that all come to Christ...

also... love without faith is nothing

sHnaCk

sHnaCk wrote: »

So you believe, it is just that you choose to reject eh? however, predestination comes into play which immidiately makes your rejection null and void. You cannot reject if you have not YET been chosen; because it is His will that all come to Christ...

also... love without faith is nothing

Your whole comment is based on your premise that destiny exists. Unless you can prove it does, your comment is "null and void".

sukikettle

Kelly I've had a lot of stuff in my life. I was even a clairvoyant and psychic and for God to truly impact your life, He has to impact others as He cares about us all. Some solutions are immediate and others are created over time as is the case in my life. He still loves you and I know He hopes you'll talk to Him again.

velocirafter

i think all the theists could do with watching this video [HTML]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-f2dUkm7Mo[/HTML]

Its by the christian guy someone mentioned earlier but it might give you a bit of advice on how to debate religion. Us atheists don't really respond well to scripture, preaching, fire and brimstone and all that. I'm not trying to sound condescending but i think it would make for a healthier debate.

sukikettle

predestination means not everyone is destined to be saved and it possibly means you and judging by your comment you're not particularly worried anyway

sukikettle

Velo....never the two shall meet mate.I can't reach you unless God opens your ears and eyes and you will never come up with an argument to shut me up because they are two completely different realms. I live in God's spiritual realm having a human experience and you are not

Dades

Suki, most of us are ex-Christians, who now have an honest belief that gods (including yours) don't exist. By honest belief I mean one where we don't believe something for fear of not believing it, but because it's what a thought process has concluded to be the case.

The idea that your omnipotent benevolent God has no choice but to send people who don't believe he exists to a hell of eternal torment is worthy of nothing but a chuckle. The threat (which is what it is) holds as much fear for an atheist as an Indonesian tribesman shaking a feathered stick at them.

velocirafter

sukikettle wrote: »

Velo....never the two shall meet mate.I can't reach you unless God opens your ears and eyes and you will never come up with an argument to shut me up because they are two completely different realms. I live in God's spiritual realm having a human experience and you are not

i prefer my realm:D

Its funny how after about 3 pages all these threads dissolve into a debate over the standard theist vs atheist arguments.

I haven't read the whole thread, but here's my take on it. The internet, imho is one of the biggest reasons why so many young people are atheists.

When I was about 15 I had nobody and nowhere to discuss my thoughts on the matter with. Now, you only have to google it to get a plethora of different views from each side, and each side of the spectrum of each side.
You have groups like this in which to discuss and challenge each other.

Society is such now that we dont have to pretend to believe in something that we dont really...

And a lot of Christians seem unable to handle this.

velocirafter

velocirafter wrote: »

i prefer my realm:D

Its funny how after about 3 pages all these threads dissolve into a debate over the standard theist vs atheist arguments.

It seems to happen in every thread I've read, no matter what the topic was to begin with:pac: