This discussion may surprise some of you, people usually put logic and atheism in the same sentence, some people even claim that to be completely rational one has to be an atheist. Today I hope to show you the absurdity of Atheism, not weak atheism, but strong, militant atheism. After reading the ‘God Delusion’ I thought Dawkins had thrown religion and my beliefs into a garbage bin; I had lost my faith and became what they call a ‘skeptic’.  However, instead of committing intellectual suicide and becoming an atheist, I was an Agnostic Deist for quite some time; I couldn’t rule out God as I had no reason too or empirical evidence to do so.

I somehow or other got my faith back (or more so destroyed my skeptical self and instead of saying, ‘I doubt it.’ Saying, ‘perhaps.’) and then it struck me, atheism is some what irrational. There are always reasons why one does or does not believe in something. For example I don’t believe in Santa because there is no man on the North pole and it is a fact that Santa was created by Coca Cola. I have reasons not to believe in pokemon, flying tea pots or even a flying spaghetti monster. When I ask an atheist why they do not believe in God, they have no rational reasons to deny His existence none, zero, nada.  This is rather odd, many atheists are famous scientists who are used to using empirical evidence and observation their whole lives and yet make the illogical conclusion that God does not exist. Dawkins thought that evolution proved that God was not in existence but was by humans (which is a big assumption). Dawkins has not ‘disproven’ God, he has dismissed a God some fundamentalists believe in.

A reason for a belief or lack of belief is a necessity for something to hold any weight.

  1. I do not believe in God
  2. Therefore, God is not real

Premise 2 needs to be backed up by something. Think about it for a second, any non belief you have is backed up by reason; you do not believe not believe n Zeus because you do not believe in him, you have some concrete reasons not to believe he exists. Perhaps even the Judeo-Christian God, you have reasons to dismiss. But you can not logically dismiss God. A being who created the universe may exist.

Some people will then try to bring in the flying tea pot argument, 'We can never dismiss that a flying tea pot does not exist, should we believe in it?' When rational people are talking about God they do not give Him any form (They may imagine He has a brown beard and appears somewhat Jewish) but we have no idea the form of God. God and the flying tea pot are not on the same page, one would have to use scientific evidence and observation to see if a flying tea pot exists. One can not see God, therefore we enter the realm of meta-physics.   So what are your guys views? I will take back what I said about atheism being irrational if I am proven wrong (note: I am talking about strong atheism, not weak).

Views: 212

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Ha ha ha!  You hit the nail on the head for me with this response! "Oh. And he's a douche. So even if he was real, I wouldn't follow him." Too funny.

But I do agree that it's not for me to prove that god exists.  I don't see that there is enough evidence to support the theory and would rather carry on with my life without religion as my compass. If ever there is proof, then I will most likely change my mind, but until then....

I know at least the 10 commandments imply other Gods ... "You shall have no other Gods before me"

 

I used this against a theist friend of mine - and she was like ... "Oh, come on!  It just means you can't worship other Gods , which are obviously FALSE Gods because there is only ONE God ..."

 

Then I was like - Why would God care if someone worships an imaginary and fake God?  Is he that easily jealous?  Wouldn't he just perform a miracle?  Why torture people in Hell?

 

Theist friend: "God works in mysterious ways ... weren't not SUPPOSED to understand him"

 

Me:  "Lolz"

The ones who were jealous were the priests who collected "god's" money for him.  They made it all up to protect their income stream from competitors.

Try to tell a theist that.  LOL.  First they will say ... "Ohhhh, it's the Old Testament!  I don't believe in that stuff!"

 

Me: "Why not?"

 

Theist: " Because it's obviously not real - it shows God to be a total jerk going on mass genocides and raping and stuff - my God is a Loving God - who showed himself through Jesus Christ "

 

Me:  "Sigh......."

Yeah, he sure showed his true colors in the new testament:  He was so mad at us for being just the way he made us that he just had to kill somebody and couldn't even think about forgiving us unless SOMEBODY was made to pay!  So, he had a son and killed him just to get the anger out of his system.  Yeah, that god is a great guy!  Such love!

Weak atheism, strong atheism... Frankly, I don't think the distinction matters too much. Perhaps you feel the same, Adam? After all, you don't offer any real distinction in your tirade.

I'm assuming that what you mean by weak atheism is the "I do not believe in a god" stance, whereas strong atheism is more of the "I believe no gods exist." Let's roll with those ideas, shall we?

As you've already seen, the typical TA member usually considers himself or herself a weak atheist. Of course, that subset of atheism isn't what you wanted to deal with, so allow me to offer something in support of strong atheism.

God does not exist. Thor does not exist. Brahma does not exist. Xenu does not exist. No gods that have been postulated by mankind exist. This is a rational stance to take because there is no evidence to suggest I should believe otherwise. Theists like to argue from ignorance here, though, and say that it's possible for a god to exist outside of a given person's knowledge. While that may be the case, there's still no reason to believe it. Since mnakind's gods do not exist, the only possibility is that a god exists that "lives" outside of my frame of reference, and does nothing to interact with my observable universe. But if this is the only option, there's no reason for me to accept it. Gods do not exist. It's worth pointing out once again that we can't prove a negative, so it's impossible for me to prove to you that no gods exist. The statement is based solely on the lack of evidence for the opposing claim.

You take issue with the idea that people try to give their concept of God a form. You think this is irrational, and I agree. However, it is important for us to give definition to the words we are using. What is a god? Are all gods creators? Are all creators gods? The answers to these questions are rather important, as one can believe the universe was "created" (see the multiverse ideas mentioned earlier in the thread), but not believe that a god was the agent behind it. Similarly, one can believe in a god but not believe that such a being actually created the universe.

Regardless of definitions, though, I contend once again that god does not exist. This is a belief, I suppose, in the same sense that I believe it isn't going to rain in my city today. In both cases, there's simply no evidence to support the conclusion, so I can happily go about my day.

It's not irrational to say that a "being who created the universe may exist" even if we don't personally believe in it, but it is irrational to assume that a "being who created the universe" must exist. Furthermore, where the true claim of rationality comes in is admitting that we could be wrong. I believe no gods exist, but hey, I could be wrong. After all, I've been wrong before. If indisputable evidence ever comes along that shows a god exists, I'll change my response. Refusing to accept evidence is what's truly irrational.

Adam and Pancakes are now friends.

I am going to need some empirical evidence... with maple syrup preferably.

In light of the evidence, I am waffling in my belief.   Maple syrup still applies.

Wow. So many posts! Where do I start?

 

I'll start with the M theory. I am not Physicist in any shape or form so I asked physics professor, my stand was that multi verse theory was a fact in the physics community, but he told me its not so at all, there are many theories out there how the universe began and it is all speculation, we do not know how the universe came into existence, we may never know. So I dismiss the M theory untill it gains more strength in the physics community and has a lot more evidence for it.

 

'My rejection of such an illogical fantasy is therefore not an illogical fallacy in itself. It is merely the application of logical rules towards the huge errors that almost everyone starts with when they begin to argue about this idea.'

 

You used the word illogical a lot and you never showed me where it is 'illogical' or a 'fantasy' to believe in a God.

 

'

Especially now, with some evidence that more than one universe exists we cannot rule our universe being started by some being in another universe.  If it is true then that being or group of beings is not a 'God but just a scientist/engineer creator.  We (or our descendants) might eventually figure out how to manipulate string theory, worm holes or some other feature in our universe to make a new universe.  Do you want to call you great to some power children "Gods" or just really smart people.'

 

What created these aliens?

 

'Is any Creator a God in your view?'

 

Well according to me deffinition, any being who created the universe is God so yes, I guess so.

 

'There is overwhelming evidence that the Universe started for random or other reasons and we do not need a "Creator" to fill in the gaps of our knowledge.'

 

If the big bang was a little bigger (by a decimal point) or a little smaller (by a decimal point) we would not exist, galaxies and elements would not exist either. There have to be 20 parameters in place (weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force etc) so if we want to go with statistics, a being who created the universe does make a lot more sense, not saying that it was a God, I guess we will never know.

 

'OK, I don't have a lot of time right now, but I do want to know why the Christian god and not any other god?'

 

I am not saying what God. I am merely saying that the universe had to have a begining and that begining was God. Im not saying that Jesus is God or that Mohammad is God's prophet. I am a Christian on how a define God, if God was to exist, He would be perfect. Absolute perfection is love, therefore God would be love. That is how I get to the Christian God.

 

'1. There is no proof that god does not exist.

2. Therefore god is real.'

 

I never gave reasons why I believe in God, I do have reasons though. So my logic does not go like that at all.

 

'But the God in the Bible are a total human fabrication'

 

You do not know that.

 

'Regardless of definitions, though, I contend once again that god does not exist. This is a belief, I suppose, in the same sense that I believe it isn't going to rain in my city today. In both cases, there's simply no evidence to support the conclusion, so I can happily go about my day. No one can prove there is a god.  No one can prove there is no god.'

 

However, usually you have some sought of reasons to believe it will rain, you may see big dark clouds heading your way, or you may read a synoptic chart and see a low pressure system is headed your way. There are still reasons why you think it will rain, however, you have no reason not to believe a God exists.

However, usually you have some sought of reasons to believe it will rain, you may see big dark clouds heading your way, or you may read a synoptic chart and see a low pressure system is headed your way. There are still reasons why you think it will rain, however, you have no reason not to believe a God exists”.

 

We believe it will rain when we see the dark clouds heading our way. We have no doubt when we get wet. It is called evidence and proof. I have reason not to believe in the existence of a god. It is called lack of evidence, not even a scrap of it, never mind actual proof.

 

Adam you were never an Atheist. You may have had doubts at some stage – that is all. An assumption on my behalf I know. Please explain how you “somehow or other got your faith back”. Do not confuse faith with the use of logic or reason.

"I am not saying what God. I am merely saying that the universe had to have a begining and that begining was God. Im not saying that Jesus is God or that Mohammad is God's prophet. I am a Christian on how a define God, if God was to exist, He would be perfect. Absolute perfection is love, therefore God would be love. That is how I get to the Christian God."

  • Prove the universe had a beginning. If so, prove that it was God. (I cannot prove it did or did not actually begin, but even if I could show that it did and that it was begun by God how does that bring us any closer to a deity that is in any way relevant?)
  • How is love absolute perfection?
  • Why would you define God as perfect?
  • What about the Christian God makes you think He is love (of all things)?

"There are still reasons why you think it will rain, however, you have no reason not to believe a God exists."

He (we) also have no reason to believe that a God does exist either.

RSS

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service