Will atheist ever get the proof of God's existence?

[BoredAgnostic]

Sometimes when I reflect deep enough, I think eternal punishment for people being so ungrateful is hardly even adequate...


I usually don't comment on this forum at all, I've been content with being a lurker and allowing people with better literary skills and knowledge discuss these topics [Although I might start adding my 2cents in here or there]....but I felt prompted to log on and respond to this statement because I find it incredibly callous. I believe any person with a shred of compassion for their fellow human being would be utterly devastated to watch people being tortured even for just a minute.. But it seems for you some people being tortured for eternity isn't enough, what would be satisfactory-you personally torturing them? It may seem ungrateful to you for someone to question our body's imperfections and our susceptibility to tens of thousands of debilitating diseases/abnormalities.. but I think it's pretty human to want to know why a perfect Creator would allow these flaws. Also, I don't think anyone here is really denying how intricate, complex and awe inspiring the body is.
I really do enjoy some of your posts, you are extremely intelligent, but I believe that just went way too far, and frankly it's frightening that so many people have that exact same mentality.

/waits to get served heh.

 

[Aurora]

Thankyou Aurora for your comments.....
Your answer is in your question. God is perfect so hence would only create things proportiate to that.
Your mind has been created to only latch onto what has been taught to us from our creator. He has informed us of his creation, only what he wants us know, from this life and in the hereafter. Its your choice whether you want to believe in that or not.

If you allow your minds imagination to get into the cycle you it would be endless. If you do find an answer to the question you then have the question of who created that creation and then who created that creation so on and so forth. This cycle is only created by the Shaytaan (Devil) who loves to whisper doubts in your mind.

You began this "cycle".
You suggested that the supposed perfection of the bodily functions of a human being required a designer to design it. Such an argument is flawed because the same can be said of the designer.

 

[gang4]

This is true. But it doesn't make belief and lack of belief equally rational.

To see this, notice that you can say the same for pretty much any other nonprovable claim. You can not prove that there are no invisible space aliens sitting on your shoulder. That isn't any reason to believe that there are.

You forget to add one more line...

...That isn't any reason to DISbelieve that they are not there either since to disbelieve is also non-provable claim.

So basically you are saying, Not to believe in God apparently is also a form of a believe. If some atheists say we are ignorant because we believe in God.... then it can be said the same...

Atheists are more ignorant than us...

Why more? because...
1. You have no God to turn to for spiritual guidance
2. you have no scriptures to guide you
3. you have no prophets as your role model
4. unclear codes of ethics how to behave


Interesting part, you may eventually select among you as your "prophet", eventually write your own scriptures and worship a created object money, babes, power... stuff like that...

and some atheists call themselves: modern, intellectual more civilized and more advance than believers who follow people of the old.

Amazing claims!

 

[Pygoscelis]

You forget to add one more line...

...That isn't any reason to DISbelieve that they are not there either since to disbelieve is also non-provable claim.

Do you disbelieve in the invisible space aliens sitting on your shoulder? Do you have any reason to disbelieve it? The analogy really is apt from the atheist point of view.

Atheists are more ignorant than us...

Why more? because...
1. You have no God to turn to for spiritual guidance
2. you have no scriptures to guide you
3. you have no prophets as your role model

True. We have to look to our own moral compas, and not bury it beneath obedience to religious doctrine. We are forced to actually think on these matters instead of simply accepting whatever others tell us our authority figure says is right.

4. unclear codes of ethics how to behave

More clear than you may think. It is true that we may differ in opinion on certain things but we tend to agree much more than we disagree on items of morality. This is because we all have empathy (seeing yourself in others). I say that this is the core of morality, even religious morality, just religion dresses it up and attributes it to an authority figure. And then some things are added that are not so moral but still seen as such because its supposedly from the same authority figure.

I say that religious "morality" is not morality at all, but simply obedience to the perceived authority. Its authoritarianism at its purest.

and some atheists call themselves: modern, intellectual more civilized and more advance than believers who follow people of the old.

Oh I dunno. Scientology is pretty modern.

 

[gang4]

True. We have to look to our own moral compas, and not bury it beneath obedience to religious doctrine. We are forced to actually think on these matters instead of simply accepting whatever others tell us our authority figure says is right.

More clear than you may think. It is true that we may differ in opinion on certain things but we tend to agree much more than we disagree on items of morality. This is because we all have empathy (seeing yourself in others). I say that this is the core of morality, even religious morality, just religion dresses it up and attributes it to an authority figure. And then some things are added that are not so moral but still seen as such because its supposedly from the same authority figure.

I say that religious "morality" is not morality at all, but simply obedience to the perceived authority. Its authoritarianism at its purest.

Oh I dunno. Scientology is pretty modern.

I wouldn't be surprise if the actual thinking of moral compas will take long time to shape. I would even less surprise if eventually the final moral compas is a downgrade version what the moral scriptures taught us.

say you have 300 millions atheist in the world, everybody think their own moral compas... how many millions different types do you suppose they have? True some moral idea will be similar, but you've been around meeting different people...I am sure you have noticed the uniqueness of each individual....

Now suppose they disagree to one another about what the moral codes..do you suppose violence won't be included to force one will to the others in the resolution?

if no violence so everybody has a freedom to their own set of moral codes.

Let say you are a married man, and an atheist say to you: since you do not use your wive this afternoon, I'd like to borrow your wive for an afternoon sex. Since logically, he needs a woman and he has none at the moment. you have her and you don't use her that afternoon...so why not?

say if you have no wive but have a 3 years old daughter...would you give her to him?

Can you imagine how dangerous and ridiculous your world would be?

you said that religious "morality" is not morality at all, but simply obedience to the perceived authority. Its authoritarianism at its purest

now let see your imaginary world...,. will it have order?... if it doesn't then chaos is the word... no need to go further...

if it does...then how the order is established? Can it really be done without authoritarianism involved?


You start from scratch this moral codes...with the characteristics of human error and the immaturity of human emotions.

After thousands of years of civilisation...we still resort to violence sometimes merely event less than a penny worth.

so how perfect this moral codes would be?


at least the moral codes the believers have is God given who created human and all things...it's been used for thousands of years...true we have our short coming...but not because the scriptures but we the human who messed up.


Scientology ...I know little... based words science + Logy....
Like I said before science has the incomplete theorem...

A believe ought to be about the truth and time-invariant not about modern or old...to me, it isn't a fashion show...

 

[Azy]

I wouldn't be surprise if the actual thinking of moral compas will take long time to shape. I would even less surprise if eventually the final moral compas is a downgrade version what the moral scriptures taught us.

I think you misunderstand, the 'moral compass' is a name for a group of emotional responses that determines how people feel under circumstances that would require morals.
For example, you walk along the riverbank and suddenly hear a woman screaming as her young child falls into the water. Would you stand and laugh while throwing stones at the child? Would an atheist?

I am sure you have noticed the uniqueness of each individual....

Now suppose they disagree to one another about what the moral codes..do you suppose violence won't be included to force one will to the others in the resolution?

You could be forgiven for thinking like that since that is how it seems to work in the middle east.
No one said that the human 'internal morality' would create world peace, it clearly wouldn't as there are other emotions at work. There are many religious groups, sects and nations that are violent despite the moral teachings of their religion.

Let say you are a married man, and an atheist say to you: since you do not use your wive this afternoon, I'd like to borrow your wive for an afternoon sex. Since logically, he needs a woman and he has none at the moment. you have her and you don't use her that afternoon...so why not?

I don't think this argument is about atheists but about people who do not follow one of your preferred religions. You could believe in god but not believe the teachings of judaism/islam etc are correct.

Anyway, back to the point, why not lend someone your wife (ignoring the interesting moral view of yours that women do not have any say in their status as property to be traded).
Atheists do not have a problem with this situation because grown-ups don't need people to hold their hand and tell them when something might upset someone, they can work it out for themselves.

say if you have no wive but have a 3 years old daughter...would you give her to him?

See above, but maybe it's time to revive the thread with the Pakistan child rape statistics.

Can you imagine how dangerous and ridiculous your world would be?
now let see your imaginary world...,. will it have order?... if it doesn't then chaos is the word... no need to go further...

My household and many of my friends do not have any religion, I have yet to see any of them rampaging around town murdering and raping old women.
Essentially what it boils down to is whether a person is smart enough to realise that in the long-term cooperation is more beneficial than self-interest (unless you have your own private army).

if it does...then how the order is established? Can it really be done without authoritarianism involved?

It's called communal decision making, something similar to the democracy some of us have now but with more consideration for everyone's viewpoint rather than just the majority.

Scientology ...I know little... based words science + Logy....
Like I said before science has the incomplete theorem...

Scientology is a religion, I think that's all I'm going to say as it's a bit weird.

A believe ought to be about the truth and time-invariant not about modern or old...to me, it isn't a fashion show...

Strange then that I hear a lot of excuses about some Quranic passages being intended for a different people in a different time.

 

[Skavau]

I'm not talking about the diseases that the body can establish, This is only for a trial and test for the person. I'm talking about the actual creation of the body. Please try to absorb this with an open mind, its the creation of the perfectly created bodily functions in which I refer to.

You have insufficiently demonstrated how anything of the human body is perfect, much less all of it being perfect. The fact that there are so many flaws render it imperfect.

Try to create anything of the like and I'm sure you or nobody in this world can. That is whats perfect.
I hope you understand now.

Being unable to create something does not make it perfect.

 

[Skavau]

You forget to add one more line...

...That isn't any reason to DISbelieve that they are not there either since to disbelieve is also non-provable claim.

Well, not true. Absence of evidence is not a conclusion I would like to make here, but ultimately it is valid. Absence of evidence is sufficient reason to not believe or to disbelieve in something. There is an absence of evidence pertaining to the existence of God, and consequently there is little reason to presume the existence of God.

Atheists are more ignorant than us...

I shall criticise this whilst keeping in mind the primary importance of the definition of 'ignorant'.

Why more? because... 1. You have no God to turn to for spiritual guidance

If Atheists are right, neither do you.

Moreover, how does not having a God constitute ignorance precisely?

2. you have no scriptures to guide you

If Atheists are right, your scriptures are meaningless.

Moreover, how does not having any scriptures to follow necessitate ignorance?

3. you have no prophets as your role model

How does this imply or assert our ignorance, precisely?

4. unclear codes of ethics how to behave

Untrue. I have very clear ethics personally and I have accepted principles which I endeavour to follow in my life. Moreover, 'clarity' or consistency in moral codes does not make them virtuous. I suspect the Nazi's were consistent in their moral beliefs, but they were not what any sane person would consider ethical.

Regrettably, it is just one my specific beliefs that theistic morality is a farce intrinsically linked with obedience. There is no virtue in following orders, but it is praised upon in theistic circles as the greatest, most objective moral system you can find.

Interesting part, you may eventually select among you as your "prophet", eventually write your own scriptures and worship a created object money, babes, power... stuff like that...

Or... we won't.

 

[Skavau]

say you have 300 millions atheist in the world, everybody think their own moral compas... how many millions different types do you suppose they have? True some moral idea will be similar, but you've been around meeting different people...I am sure you have noticed the uniqueness of each individual....

We have more than 300 million atheists in the world. Most of them reside in Western countries where they make up significant minorities or slight majorities. We know of that the Western countries that most atheists live in, that they are modern, civilised, liberal and progressive. Your example isn't the most scary by modern standards at all.

Everyone disagrees on ethical assertions. Moral confusion is present within religious individuals just as in non-religious individuals. No-one objectively appears to be able to decide what God's message is to the world. This itself leads to moral confusion if the argument against Atheism and morality is accepted. Why should any religious ethical scripture be accepted over another one? Should it be accepted on the basis that one is specifically true or just? Then which one is true and/or just? The inevitable result is that each time you declare a religious ideology to be perfect morally then you lead yourself to having to defend the ideologies supposed perfections. The argument that claims that religion offers a set of moral principles in which people should follow. These deontological principles offer nothing more than assertions in how we should act. There is no justification given for the assertions within scripture other than God proclaimed it.

Now suppose they disagree to one another about what the moral codes..do you suppose violence won't be included to force one will to the others in the resolution?

Well, in most Western Secular states you find many times, that the population is split on many ethical decisions. We have not resorted to a state of chaos as of yet.

Let say you are a married man, and an atheist say to you: since you do not use your wive this afternoon, I'd like to borrow your wive for an afternoon sex. Since logically, he needs a woman and he has none at the moment. you have her and you don't use her that afternoon...so why not?

Your moral compass is skewed.

Although rather ironically, as long as all parties were in consent (the married man, the atheist and the wife) there would be nothing wrong with the event whatsoever.

say if you have no wive but have a 3 years old daughter...would you give her to him?

Are you familiar with 'unwanted children'?

Can you imagine how dangerous and ridiculous your world would be?

You could have used worse examples that I would have explained away.

you said that religious "morality" is not morality at all, but simply obedience to the perceived authority. Its authoritarianism at its purest

Correct.

now let see your imaginary world...,. will it have order?... if it doesn't then chaos is the word... no need to go further...

It does have order.

I live in a non-religious society.

You start from scratch this moral codes...with the characteristics of human error and the immaturity of human emotions.

Strawman.

We do not start from scratch.

at least the moral codes the believers have is God given who created human and all things...it's been used for thousands of years...true we have our short coming...but not because the scriptures but we the human who messed up.

Not quite.

There are some aspects of Islamic scripture that I believe to be morally wrong and believe I should not be obliged to follow or observe.

 

[gang4]

Instead of taken as an extreme example of moral case which are needed to present a case... boom!

somehow it became my skewed moral compass
and it became my personal point of view seeing woman as a traded property which you ignored....LOL

Skavau, I got the word ignorance from you...now, you want a definition?

 

[Skavau]

Instead of taken as an extreme example of moral case which are needed to present a case... boom!

somehow it became my skewed moral compass

For you even to assume or believe that Atheists think as you do implies your moral compass is indeed, skewed.

and it became my personal point of view seeing woman as a traded property which you ignored....LOL

Not at all. If I recall, I directly answered that.

Skavau, I got the word ignorance from you...now, you want a definition?

Is this a personal insult?

 

[جوري]

Skye Ephémérine, imo, the most important aspect of evolution is the incredibly long time over which things occurred. Have you ever folded a sheet of paper in half, then in half, again and again. You can fold only 7 or 8 times (I think) and the reason being is the power of numbers.

I don't know what a 'really long time' does to anything? Perhaps you can demonstrate that for me?.. has your pet rock changed in the last 30 years? developed sentience, organs, and a higher reticular system?
You can fold a paprt higher than 7-8 times, I know because I have tried it, you see I too get the same silly emails that everyone has as fwd.. Shouldn't you be a little critical of what you read? perhaps experiment?

2 to the power of just 20 (kind of like generations) is quickly one million. If you compare 20 to say 20 million, the numbers get unfathomably huge. I would expect everything to look incredibly designed and incredibly complex over such a long time and the same can be said about the cosmos. When I look at something beautiful, I tend to appreciate time than I guess I do a god.

Interesting, time is an attribute of God!

Allah (swt ), says:

" And they say: "There is nothing but our life in this world: We die and we live and nothing destroys us except time." And they have no knowledge of it, they only conjecture" (Qur'an 45:24)

Allah (swt ), Most Glorified, Most High, informs us in this verse about the disbelieving dahris1 from among the Arabs and others, who do not believe in any life, save the life of this world, nor in the Rabb and Creator, Allah (swt ), Most High. They believe that nothing causes death except the passage of time. Then Allah (swt ), Most Glorified, Most High, refutes their claims, saying that they have absolutely no evidence for what they claim, but instead, depend upon surmise and their own vain opinions.

Benefits Derived From This Verse

1. That attributing good or evil to the passage of time is a sign of atheism.

2. Confirmation of a life after death for mankind.

3. That ad-dahr (time) is not one of Allah's Names.

Relevance of This Verse to the Subject of the Chapter

That the verse rejects those who attribute events to time, for they commit a great wrong against Allah (swt ).

Relevance of This Verse to the Subject of Tawheed

That it rejects those who attribute events to time, because in so doing, they are ascribing a partner to Allah (swt ), for it is He, Alone Who decrees what will be and what will not be.

..ooOOoo..

It is authentically reported on the authority of Abu Hurairah (ra ) that the Prophet (saas ) said: "Allah (swt ), Most Blessed, Most High, says: "The son of Adam wrongs Me: He curses time, though I am time: In My Hands are all things and I cause the night to follow the day." 2 In another narration, He (saas ) says: "Do not curse time, for verily, time is Allah (swt )."

Allah (swt ), Most Glorified, Most High informs us in this Hadith Qudsi, that man commits a great wrong against Allah (swt ) when he curses time and attributes the occurrence of events to it, for Allah (swt ) is the Rabb of time and the Disposer of affairs and it is by His Qadr that events take place. Therefore to curse time is to curse the Owner of time.

In the second narration, the Prophet (saas ) forbids us from cursing time, saying that Allah (swt ) is the Owner of time and the Disposer of it and all events and affairs, and this is confirmation of what was reported in the preceding Hadith Qudsi.

Benefits Derived From This Hadith

1. The forbiddance of cursing time.

2. That no actions may be attributed to time.

Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of the Chapter

That it proves that to curse time is to commit a great wrong against Allah (swt ).

anyhow, you'll forgive that I don't see anything logical about what you are writing.. you are entitled to your opinion though weak and preposterous as it is!

peace

 

[Tornado]

A rock doesn't reproduce though. When something reproduces over and over again for such a long time, you would think things could become very complex. My point is that beauty, complexity doesn't have to come from a god. If a god created energy, I have no trouble imagining that just that energy and without a god's guidance (and of course there could have been one) could lead to everything we see today because 13.7 billions years is an incredibly long time.

 

[جوري]

Sometimes when I reflect deep enough, I think eternal punishment for people being so ungrateful is hardly even adequate...


I usually don't comment on this forum at all, I've been content with being a lurker and allowing people with better literary skills and knowledge discuss these topics [Although I might start adding my 2cents in here or there]....but I felt prompted to log on and respond to this statement because I find it incredibly callous. I believe any person with a shred of compassion for their fellow human being would be utterly devastated to watch people being tortured even for just a minute.. But it seems for you some people being tortured for eternity isn't enough, what would be satisfactory-you personally torturing them? It may seem ungrateful to you for someone to question our body's imperfections and our susceptibility to tens of thousands of debilitating diseases/abnormalities.. but I think it's pretty human to want to know why a perfect Creator would allow these flaws. Also, I don't think anyone here is really denying how intricate, complex and awe inspiring the body is.
I really do enjoy some of your posts, you are extremely intelligent, but I believe that just went way too far, and frankly it's frightening that so many people have that exact same mentality.

/waits to get served heh.

I don't see what eternal torture for deserving folks is callous? I believe in justice, and everyone will get exactly what they deserve for what they have earned. Allah isn't unjust, so he tells us in the Quran..

[Pickthal 99:1] When Earth is shaken with her (final) earthquake
[Pickthal 99:2] And Earth yieldeth up her burdens,
[Pickthal 99:3] And man saith: What aileth her?
[Pickthal 99:4] That day she will relate her chronicles,
[Pickthal 99:5] Because thy Lord inspireth her.
[Pickthal 99:6] That day mankind will issue forth in scattered groups to be shown their deeds.
[Pickthal 99:7] And whoso doeth good an atom's weight will see it then,
[Pickthal 99:8] And whoso doeth ill an atom's weight will see it then.

Frankly, it is I who is amused by your mentality, the sort that finds compassion for criminals and would deny justice to victims simply because it appears 'callous' to dispense with justice!

cheers

 

[جوري]

A rock doesn't reproduce though. When something reproduces over and over again for such a long time, you would think things could become very complex. My point is that beauty, complexity doesn't have to come from a god. If a god created energy, I have no trouble imagining that just that energy and without a god's guidance (and of course there could have been one) could lead to everything we see today because 13.7 billions years is an incredibly long time.

Ever heard of abiogenesis? it is scientific like the theory of evolution, so the burden of proof is on you to make it data-based rather than hot air?

Either way, I don't see how evolution over billions and billions and billions and billions of years disproves God?

Tell you what, seeing that I am out of time and don't want to be baited into an asinine debate, when you come up with something solid and apprehensible, do reply.. until then just spare me the recycled rhetoric..


cheers

 

[gang4]

For you even to assume or believe that Atheists think as you do implies your moral compass is indeed, skewed.


Not at all. If I recall, I directly answered that.


Is this a personal insult?

I could say it was never my intention to insult anybody, but of course you have your freedom to draw your own conclusion.

And if you are interested to play word-boxing to exercise self-pride... I am not.
It seems to me one of us or both incapacitate to have a fruitful discussion. I see no reason to continue.

Of course , any last words you have to reply this message, I 'll try not to respond. So, you can have the last word..... (and no personal insult was intended... I didn't know I need to place this line on the previous post.... my bad )

 

[Pygoscelis]

I would even less surprise if eventually the final moral compas is a downgrade version what the moral scriptures taught us.

And I wouldn't be at all suprised if a religion when being created incorporated moral values of the day, many of which would be moral values common amongst most humans. The holy books don't say "thou shalt not steal" because god arbitrarily decided he wanted us not to steal, the books say that because the people already had this moral value and so they attributed it to the God that they created. This is also why people assign genders to gods (we say he and she, not it) and attribute characteristics to them and personal interests.

say you have 300 millions atheist in the world, everybody think their own moral compas... how many millions different types do you suppose they have?

Many. But most would be very similar. Why? Because they all come from common origins. Human empathy is a biological response that we have as a species. We all have it (well except for sociopaths) but some of us manage to bury it beneath religions and other ideologies.

Now suppose they disagree to one another about what the moral codes..do you suppose violence won't be included to force one will to the others in the resolution?

Quite possibly violence could errupt from time to time. But now take that same example and dress it up in religion. Add a ton of authoritarianism and tribalism (both of which are fostered greatly by religion) attached to each differing view and that same minor disagreement above becomes a major world event. Then just for flavour, add in a bunch of nonsense morals to further fight over (arbitrary things like "don't work on a particular day" or "wear a particular garment" or "mutilate your genitals")

Let say you are a married man, and an atheist say to you: since you do not use your wive this afternoon, I'd like to borrow your wive for an afternoon sex. Since logically, he needs a woman and he has none at the moment. you have her and you don't use her that afternoon...so why not?

Given that both men and the woman (or both women and the man if a woman wants to borrow another woman's man) consent, then why not indeed? The three of them are not hurting anyone. Let them do what they want. Its not my business. I'm not going to judge them. I'm not going to scream at them that they deserve eternal punishment. I'm certainly not going to do violence to them because they offended some god I made up.

now let see your imaginary world...,. will it have order?... if it doesn't then chaos is the word... no need to go further...

Do you think religious authoritarianism is the only way we can have order in the world?

Can it really be done without authoritarianism involved?

Certainly. Democracy doesn't need authoritarianism. In fact authoritarianism erodes democracy, as we see in the current US administration. When people stop thinking for themselves, fear voicing dissenting opinions, and agree to whatever leader wants, trouble is not far behind.

You start from scratch this moral codes...with the characteristics of human error and the immaturity of human emotions.

No, not start from scratch. Morality existed before religion, and I think most religious folks realize this. Do christians really believe that the ancient jews found it good to murder before Moses told them otherwise? Do muslims really believe that before the quran the arab people thought it a virtue to rape and steal?

 

[Pygoscelis]

double post. delete.

 

[Tornado]

Ever heard of abiogenesis? it is scientific like the theory of evolution, so the burden of proof is on you to make it data-based rather than hot air?

Either way, I don't see how evolution over billions and billions and billions and billions of years disproves God?

Tell you what, seeing that I am out of time and don't want to be baited into an asinine debate, when you come up with something solid and apprehensible, do reply.. until then just spare me the recycled rhetoric..


cheers

:? I never said it disproved god, I said it doesn't need god because time can account for the complexity, meaning that if you want to convince an atheist, don't offer that as evidence. It's not. I don't know much about abiogenesis but if it's actual science, I doubt it's just hot air.

As I've said before, this thread isn't doing much. Whether there is a god or not doesn't matter. If there was proof of a god, then I'd be a deist. The only question I as an atheist is concerned with is what evidence is there that a certain religion is right? (not looking for answers in this thread). As far as lifestyle goes, atheists, agnostics, deists or anyone who doesn't believe in a personal god are pretty much the same in that we don't know believe in a religious god so it's confusing why atheists seem to be looked down upon, perhaps we speak louder?

 

[Tornado]

Only a mentally deluded fool would believe in god, jinni, iblees, flying buraq, prophets, life after death, heaven and hell and all that nonsense.

You make it sound as if it's their fault. When you were religious, would you not have agreed with them? You should know how it feels to be in their shoes.