Being an atheist.

[SixTen]

SixTen did, if you look back a few posts.



As so often when a theist attempt to describe atheistic views you end up with a strawman. Atheists are "dumbfounded" at nothing of the sort.
No atheist sees the creation of God as the cause of God. To an atheist God HAS no cause as God does not exist.

The point is that theists insist everything else must have a cause while God does not, while providing no satisfactory answer as to why God should be an exception (and before anybody bothers, I've seen them all). The point then arises that if the most complicated entity of all, God, is not created (and hence, by definition, does not require a creator) then why are theists "dumbfounded" at the suggestion that a 'creator' is not required for everything else?

The whole theist argument stands on the assumption that God is somehow different in that respect. That assumption is based solely on the words "because He is". God is what He is defined to be.

Here is where you make a mistake. Theists do say the universe has a cause - for if it did not - it is as good as not being created, that is it existed always. It is a fact that time existed where the universe did not exist, so itself and everything within is finite. Now, you may think the universe just came into existance by accident, by all means, but some of us don't. Its existance and subsequently ours, it has made us wonder about things beyond this universe. We find that, we could not have a finite thing existing suddenly in an, conceptwise can be considered infinite (i.e. we can't limit) timespan (i.e period before the universe existed). It gets us wondering why anything exists at all. Then that somewhat leads to the principle of causality/Kalalm's cosmological arguement. Some conclude from it, a God exists, some don't. But, by definition, God is causeless. So you can't have a God that is created, as that would mean its no longer God, hence its stupid to argue if God is created or not, you either believe he exists or not.

God is different, as is anything else outside the limits of this universe, just because its not bound to it, but surely that is obvious? You can see God as a solution to a problem, you may not understand it, just like you won't understand why the square root of minus 1 can be a solution to a pragmatic problem in finance.

 

[Tornado]

Who created Allah is an irrelevant question for myself because you can keep asking who created that god that made Allah, who made that god that made another god that made Allah, etc.. and seeing as how this particular argument about logic not applying outside the universe isn't swaying me away from my opinion convincingly enough because it's just very confusing/convoluted.

That's obviously not the reason why I'm an atheist. The point is, I'm content that everything (complexity) can arise by itself without a god.

Again, this doesn't bother me because let's just say there is a god who did happen to start the universe. (I'm an atheist because I think there is no god, if I did, I'd be a deist, or I could be agnostic, basically, we (atheists, agnostics, deists) all think that a personal god doesn't exist.)

Now, it's your job to prove that the religion of Islam is the right one. How do I know that events said in the holy books are factual or whether they were man-made?

 

[Duncan Ferguson]

If there was a god or gods how would we know?

God is held to be a supernatural entity. A supernatural being which differs in kind from a natural existence must exist without limitations. This amounts to saying that God has no nature.

As a confirmed and lifelong atheist, I cannot prove the non-existence of a god, because the tools to do so do not exist. By the same token, theists cannot prove that such a deity exists.

 

[Duncan Ferguson]

We human beings often overlook our own limits in an air of unintentional arrogance. I am guilty of it myself all the time, and I would like to point it out here in this discussion. Here is one way I like to explain it. If you were to live in a room with a monkey for a million years, given only the task of teach that monkey calculus, would you be able to do it? The answer is obviously no, but the real point comes in asking why not. Why not? Well the monkey not only doesn't care to learn calculus, it cannot comprehend calculus. Calculus is at a level of thinking that is beyond the monkey's perception.

Not only is the monkey unable to ever learn calculus, it actually doesn't know where its limit is. It doesn't sit there thinking, "Man I wish I could do calculus like that awesome human." It probably just wants a banana.

This is a fallacious argument. The thing that learns calculus is not a monkey but an entity only just short of learning calculus.

Now with humans, it is likely the same deal. We have a limit somewhere, and we know that. But we don't know WHERE it is! And we don't know how much knowledge and understanding lies hidden beyond the limits of the mere 5 senses we use to formulate our meager interpretation of the universe.

You contradict yourself when you speak of an epistemology outside the realm of epistemology. What evidence do you have of these limits? There are things that we can never know, for sure, but you are making an assumption that such things exist. How can we know that something that cannot be known can be known?

Okay sorry if that analogy went a little too far, it may not have made any sense. But what I mean to say is basically that human logic and reasoning just isn't all it's cracked up to be. Because the reality is that we cannot know where the limit to our perception lies, and thus we can only apply our learned system of reasoning to matters of this world in which we learned it. There must be a lot more to everything else than we can even imagine.

Are you saying that there is a limit to imagination?

Regarding the explanatory power of reason, provided that something is based upon evidence and is neither internally nor externally contradictory then it can be called knowledge. If something doesn't fulfil these requirements then how can it be called knowledge?

That "everything else" is referred to in arabic as the "ghayb." Ghayb is that which we not only do not know, but cannot know or perceive with our limitations as human beings.

I am still not 100% sure of any religion, though I like to call myself muslim and I am most of the time (I know it's a weird situation). But I do know that I believe in ghayb, and I think even atheists should at least accept its possible existence. Going around rejecting everything based on the all-high super-awesome "human reason" will never get us far.

Ghayb is a word with which I am unfamilar, but it seems to be a very useful term. Again, what you are saying when you say you believe in ghayb is that you can know things that can't be known. I agree with you that the concept of ghayb exists, but a more rational approach would state that if something can't be shown to exist then it probably doesn't exist.

 

[root]

If you dont mind me asking...in space..our earth hardly gets hit with meteors..where as the moon, which is very closely positioned to us is full of craters. Dont you think its not just by pure luck earth is somehow protected for a very long time? Mars is full of craters too.

Actually our earth is hit more often than that of the moon!

 

[Duncan Ferguson]

Actually our earth is hit more often than that of the moon!

This is true. Most meteorites burn up in the Earth's atmosphere - an atmosphere brought about by the existence of life rather than the other way around. Meteor and cometary dust grains contribute about 300 tonnes of organic material to the Earth every year.

 

[Azy]

It is a fact that time existed where the universe did not exist, so itself and everything within is finite.

Will you please qualify this statement?

But, by definition, God is causeless.

That is the problem that Trumble is getting at.
Theists say the universe is so complex and amazing that it must be created.
Theists say God is so complex and amazing but it's ok, he's uncreated..
why? Because we said so.

So you can't have a God that is created, as that would mean its no longer God, hence its stupid to argue if God is created or not, you either believe he exists or not.

It is perfectly acceptable to argue the point when theists wave their magic wand and poof away all reason and consistency when talking about what does and doesn't need creating and why (if why is even a relevant question in this field).

You can see God as a solution to a problem, you may not understand it, just like you won't understand why the square root of minus 1 can be a solution to a pragmatic problem in finance.

Aren't the properties of -1 only such because we define them that way?

 

[SixTen]

Will you please qualify this statement?

What do you mean?

That is the problem that Trumble is getting at.
Theists say the universe is so complex and amazing that it must be created.
Theists say God is so complex and amazing but it's ok, he's uncreated..
why? Because we said so.

Incorrect, the Universe can be simple, it does not make it more likely to exist without a cause, to just randomly exist, come into creation at a random moment out of chance.

You see, the universe is something which had a beginning - We say something must have existed without a beginning i.e. God, for anything to make sense.

It is perfectly acceptable to argue the point when theists wave their magic wand and poof away all reason and consistency when talking about what does and doesn't need creating and why (if why is even a relevant question in this field).
Aren't the properties of -1 only such because we define them that way?

God has been the solution via reason to why something exists rather than nothing by philosophers for thousands of years, its not something which just popped out of the bible or Qur'an. It is a philosophical view, of everything. Something which does not need a cause must exist for anything else to exist - and we know this isn't the universe (which, btw, people did argue before, that the universe has always existed so its no point arguing about God) as now it is known that it had a beginning.

 

[Muezzin]

See, until philosophers and scientists become one and the same again (like back in the day), these arguments will continue ad infinitum.

Oh well. At least they help keep the Internet alive.

 

[Azy]

Muezzin, what's a PhD?

What do you mean?

You said "It is a fact that time existed where the universe did not exist", I'm just curious as to where this information came from and why you think it is correct.

Incorrect, the Universe can be simple, it does not make it more likely to exist without a cause, to just randomly exist, come into creation at a random moment out of chance.

What do you mean by "can be simple", last time I checked the universe was a very complex place.

You see, the universe is something which had a beginning - We say something must have existed without a beginning i.e. God, for anything to make sense.

Explain to me why something must have existed without a beginning, and then explain why that thing must be God.

God has been the solution via reason to why something exists rather than nothing by philosophers for thousands of years, its not something which just popped out of the bible or Qur'an. It is a philosophical view, of everything. Something which does not need a cause must exist for anything else to exist - and we know this isn't the universe (which, btw, people did argue before, that the universe has always existed so its no point arguing about God) as now it is known that it had a beginning.

God has never been the solution "via reason", God has always been the solution to all the questions that human discovery has yet to answer. If it was possible to reason with the idea of God then we wouldn't be here discussing it, it would just be a matter of fact.

 

[Muezzin]

Muezzin, what's a PhD?

Good point.

Except philosophy and science are still seen as separate fields. Faith is fundametally a philospohical endeavour, no?

Anyway, I think I'm driving Tornado's topic off-topic. Sorry.

 

[Tornado]

Good point.

Except philosophy and science are still seen as separate fields. Faith is fundametally a philospohical endeavour, no?

Anyway, I think I'm driving Tornado's topic off-topic. Sorry.

That's O.K. Forget about first cause/etc.. Not a problem for atheists anyway since even if there was a god, it'd be a deist god.

What evidence is there that the holy books were factual and not made up by man?

 

[Fishman]

This is true. Most meteorites burn up in the Earth's atmosphere - an atmosphere brought about by the existence of life rather than the other way around. Meteor and cometary dust grains contribute about 300 tonnes of organic material to the Earth every year.

The Earth did have an atmosphere before life, it just wasn't breathable. Venus is smaller than earth and closer to the sun, but its atmosphere is much thicker than ours. Why wouldn't the early earth have an Atmosphere?

 

[Uthman]

Hi Tornado,

What evidence is there that the holy books were factual and not made up by man?

This is quoted from a post by Ansar Al-'Adl here.

1. The Power of the Qur'anic Message:

-it is universal, unrestricted by time and applicable to any nation/culture. The Qur'an is by far the most widely followed and acted-upon book in the world. As for the Bible, most Christians follow the Church over the Bible, and each denomination has its own bible anyway. The fact that there is no other book in the world that forms the constitution of the lives of billions of followers is itself a sign.
-it is practical and logical, it can be established practically in society and is logically able to address the fundamental questions relating to all aspects of our universe.
-it is comprehensive, addressing all fundamental sectors of human life, be it spritual, physical, mental, social/societal, politcal, environmental, economic, etc.
-it is natural, in concordance with a person's nature and what they feel deep inside to be the truth.
-it is clear and consistent, free of the changes in worldview and understanding that dominate the works of human beings.
-it is deep, having provoked thousands upon thousands of volumes of exegesis, expounding upon its meaning and revealing fascinating details that many people otherwise miss in their reading of the Qur'an.​

2. The Power of the Qur'anic Style:

-it is Interactive, the text seems alive as it responds to the very questions that arise in one's mind at that moment. It speaks to the reader and delivers specific yet universal advice.
-it is Inerrant, free from contradictons and discrepancies, or other errors that would normally be found in the works of human beings.
-it is Memorizable; the Qur'an is the only book in the world which is continuously being memorized by millions of people and recited daily. No other book has been committed to memory by so many followers, as though it fits in one's mind as a key in a lock.
-its Language, the Qur'anic arabic is a stunning miracle in itself, its style is powerful and its recitation is melodious. More info: Here, Here, Here.​

3. The Power of the Qur'anic Text:

-it is Preserved, even after fourteen and a half centuries, the Qur'an is recited today exactly as it was first revealed. Thus it was free of the tampering that befell other religious scriptures.
-its other Remarkable features; many Muslims find a striking concordance between many Qur'anic statements and established scientific truths, which could not have been known by any normal human being 14 centuries ago. (see here). Many Muslims have also found the Qur'anic perfection extends even to various mathematical miracles within the text. As well, there are the Qur'anic Prophecies.
-its Authorship; the context in which the Qur'an was revealed leaves the reader with no other conclusion than the fact that it could only be the word of God.​

Regards

 

[Tornado]

Hi Tornado,



This is quoted from a post by Ansar Al-'Adl here.

1. The Power of the Qur'anic Message:

-it is universal, unrestricted by time and applicable to any nation/culture. The Qur'an is by far the most widely followed and acted-upon book in the world. As for the Bible, most Christians follow the Church over the Bible, and each denomination has its own bible anyway. The fact that there is no other book in the world that forms the constitution of the lives of billions of followers is itself a sign.
-it is practical and logical, it can be established practically in society and is logically able to address the fundamental questions relating to all aspects of our universe.
-it is comprehensive, addressing all fundamental sectors of human life, be it spritual, physical, mental, social/societal, politcal, environmental, economic, etc.
-it is natural, in concordance with a person's nature and what they feel deep inside to be the truth.
-it is clear and consistent, free of the changes in worldview and understanding that dominate the works of human beings.
-it is deep, having provoked thousands upon thousands of volumes of exegesis, expounding upon its meaning and revealing fascinating details that many people otherwise miss in their reading of the Qur'an.​

2. The Power of the Qur'anic Style:

-it is Interactive, the text seems alive as it responds to the very questions that arise in one's mind at that moment. It speaks to the reader and delivers specific yet universal advice.
-it is Inerrant, free from contradictons and discrepancies, or other errors that would normally be found in the works of human beings.
-it is Memorizable; the Qur'an is the only book in the world which is continuously being memorized by millions of people and recited daily. No other book has been committed to memory by so many followers, as though it fits in one's mind as a key in a lock.
-its Language, the Qur'anic arabic is a stunning miracle in itself, its style is powerful and its recitation is melodious. More info: Here, Here, Here.​

3. The Power of the Qur'anic Text:

-it is Preserved, even after fourteen and a half centuries, the Qur'an is recited today exactly as it was first revealed. Thus it was free of the tampering that befell other religious scriptures.
-its other Remarkable features; many Muslims find a striking concordance between many Qur'anic statements and established scientific truths, which could not have been known by any normal human being 14 centuries ago. (see here). Many Muslims have also found the Qur'anic perfection extends even to various mathematical miracles within the text. As well, there are the Qur'anic Prophecies.
-its Authorship; the context in which the Qur'an was revealed leaves the reader with no other conclusion than the fact that it could only be the word of God.​

Regards

I was really hoping you wouldn't go to the book for evidence. I'm asking whether these events actually happened, or any in any other holy books.

 

[KAding]

i shall sum up your post in two words:

atheism sucks

Well, it depends with what religion you compare it with I suppose. After all, atheism does provide relief from archaic moral codes or meaningless rituals.

 

[suffiyan007]

A life grasp in life, we must adopt the Religion as our faith,without Faith and guidance,no where we are going.A religion,is a road we gonna take,there a lotsa religion,Allah sees which one we choose...Allah had created lotsa religion in the world....is to see the people have faith to Allah or not..The World is Created by the Light of Muhammad pBuh...no guidance if not Islam revealed the truth!

 

[LennyLen]

Hi all. Just came on here for some general reading but became quite absorbed in this topic.

My view of religion is that is simply a guide on how to live your life. I believe that the parables in religious books are not to be taken literally. Did any of them really happen ? God is simply the answer to the unknown, but does god really exist ? How easy it is to have all of lifes questions answered by saying 'God did it'.
I believe that WE created God to eleviate our own fears, to provide us comfort in times of uncertainty, and to give hope to a unexplained existance.
Im not sure
Now lets just say there is a God....He gave humans free will. So why is it that we would then be punished (for eternity might I add) for exercising that free will (i.e Not believing in God). Would God enjoy punishing us ? Why not allow us to use the freedom and knowledge that he gave us ?
Why was God so prominent at the time these religious books were written, yet now absent ?

Religious texts were written at a time and by a people who did not understand their place on the earth or in the universe, much the same as today really (The only difference being that our advancement in technology has allowed us to expand on and confirm theories that have been around for centuries).

-its other Remarkable features; many Muslims find a striking concordance between many Qur'anic statements and established scientific truths, which could not have been known by any normal human being 14 centuries ago. (see here). Many Muslims have also found the Qur'anic perfection extends even to various mathematical miracles within the text.

I find this statement slightly arrogant to assume that human beings 14 centuries ago were not intelligent or knowlegable enough to comprehend science.
For example, Egyptian civilisations out date Islam by at least 5000yrs, yet their understanding of the sciences, the universe, etc, was pretty vast.
Egyptians could perform the four basic mathematical operations; addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. They could use fractions, calculate the volumes of boxes and pyramids, and calculate the surface areas of rectangles, triangles, circles and even spheres. They understood basic concepts of algebra and geometry, and could solve simple sets of simultaneous equations.

 

[Tornado]

The Library of Alexandria existed about 2 millenia ago and contained vast amounts of knowledge. What I find remarkable is that someone back in those days attempted to calculate the circumference of the Earth and was not that far off when you think about how long ago that was. I wonder exactly how much that library contained having been burned down : (

 

[Fishman]

The Library of Alexandria existed about 2 millenia ago and contained vast amounts of knowledge. What I find remarkable is that someone back in those days attempted to calculate the circumference of the Earth and was not that far off when you think about how long ago that was.

What I find remarkable is that somebody burnt it down. We still don't know the true culprit...