Is Atheism a religion? If not, what is?

[AlbqOwl]

Oh, in other words, the existence of extra-solar planets is an established fact, since you're using the "Big Bang" event as the standard.



Life is one thing, probable but no evidence observed. Planets are observed.

They haven't been directly imaged, but the effects they're causing are attributable only to bodies less massive than stars and more massive than gnats....planets.

No Sweetie. I'm using the 'big bang theory' as an illustration, not a standard. There's a difference.

Otherwise we're arguing the same side of the question here. Except I can't tell if you agree with the scientists that the calculations they are doing are mostly likely indicative of planets existing. I do agree with the scientists, most of whom are going with that theory.

Now what if most scientists were disagreeing with this theory and were saying that the calculations were a real stretch? Would we still be feeling as secure with a scientific opinion that planets outside our solar system have been discovered?

Conversely, more than 90% of Americans profess belief in some sort of diety or deities, and a good number of those claim a personal experience with the deity they believe in, despite the best efforts of the Atheists to disprove their belief. That to me would suggest the preponderance of probability of the existence of a deity or deities.

Nevertheless, believers cannot prove the existence of a deity to another person any more than an Atheist can prove that no such deity exists. And at this time scientists cannot prove the existence of other planets any more than scientists can prove such other planets do not exist.

Of course there remains a possibility that we will develop technology to prove the other planet theory. I have no such confidence that that we will be able to prove the existence of God as that is definitely God's prerogative and not ours to do.

 

[Donkey1499]

No Sweetie. I'm using the 'big bang theory' as an illustration, not a standard. There's a difference.

Otherwise we're arguing the same side of the question here. Except I can't tell if you agree with the scientists that the calculations they are doing are mostly likely indicative of planets existing. I do agree with the scientists, most of whom are going with that theory.

Now what if most scientists were disagreeing with this theory and were saying that the calculations were a real stretch? Would we still be feeling as secure with a scientific opinion that planets outside our solar system have been discovered?

Conversely, more than 90% of Americans profess belief in some sort of diety or deities, and a good number of those claim a personal experience with the deity they believe in, despite the best efforts of the Atheists to disprove their belief. That to me would suggest the preponderance of probability of the existence of a deity or deities.

Nevertheless, believers cannot prove the existence of a deity to another person any more than an Atheist can prove that no such deity exists. And at this time scientists cannot prove the existence of other planets any more than scientists can prove such other planets do not exist.

Of course there remains a possibility that we will develop technology to prove the other planet theory. I have no such confidence that that we will be able to prove the existence of God as that is definitely God's prerogative and not ours to do.

Y'all wanna see other planets? Get a frickin' telescope. They've been around fer centuries!

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

No Sweetie. I'm using the 'big bang theory' as an illustration, not a standard. There's a difference.

Since you feel free to use "sweetie", I"m sure you won't complain if I call you "Toots"?

You used the Big Bang Theory, period, and established the standard thereby. Don't like it? Go learn some science.

Otherwise we're arguing the same side of the question here.

Oh? Have you decided to recant and you now agree that, as the dictionary so states, atheism is not a religion?

Except I can't tell if you agree with the scientists that the calculations they are doing are mostly likely indicative of planets existing. I do agree with the scientists, most of whom are going with that theory.

Now what if most scientists were disagreeing with this theory and were saying that the calculations were a real stretch? Would we still be feeling as secure with a scientific opinion that planets outside our solar system have been discovered?

That's a good question. Well, not really. Science isn't about polls. Your question fails to make sense.

Conversely, more than 90% of Americans profess belief in some sort of diety or deities, and a good number of those claim a personal experience with the deity they believe in, despite the best efforts of the Atheists to disprove their belief. That to me would suggest the preponderance of probability of the existence of a deity or deities.

That to me suggests that 90% of Americans couldn't think their way out of a wet paper bag.

Nevertheless, believers cannot prove the existence of a deity to another person any more than an Atheist can prove that no such deity exists.

Atheists don't have to prove something doesn't exist. You say it does exist. You have no evidence. Why then, should people honest enough to say that it doesn't exist have to prove their claims when its you people suffering the delusions?

And at this time scientists cannot prove the existence of other planets any more than scientists can prove such other planets do not exist.

That's just baloney. You fail to define the word "prove", of course, because I doubt if you understand the science behind extra-solar planets in the first place, and because, of course, it's the science claiming something exists, and it's you claiming something exists, and here you are demanding proof from the scientists yet providing none for your own position.

Of course there remains a possibility that we will develop technology to prove the other planet theory.

Technology already exists. Extra-solar planets are observed fact, not theory.

I have no such confidence that that we will be able to prove the existence of God as that is definitely God's prerogative and not ours to do.

Well, the real reason you can't prove the existence of God is that She's a figment of your imagination, and you're using the dodge that your figment doesn't want to come out an play to hide from yourself that you're talking about a six-foot tall white rabbit.

 

[i believe in tranquility]

ok i believe in evolution and all, but when atheists state that the Big Bang what started it all.......what started the Big Bang...thats where "the deity" comes in. but whatever its just a perspective that I will get bashed on for saying.

 

[Dogger807]

ok i believe in evolution and all, but when atheists state that the Big Bang what started it all.......what started the Big Bang...thats where "the deity" comes in. but whatever its just a perspective that I will get bashed on for saying.

And where does the deity come from.. what's his or her origin? No I find it harder to believe that a sentient being created itself out of nothingness.

 

[i believe in tranquility]

what im saying is what created the Big Bang....dont ask me where God comes from...im not God...so i couldnt tell you that. What i am asking is what made teh big bang theory...in my mind THAT is God.

 

[fooligan]

Atheism is a religion. Messed up as it is, like all others :doh

I have my belief system... I'm sure you do too.

Tom Cruise is going to Hell.

 

[Thorgasm]

And where does the deity come from.. what's his or her origin? No I find it harder to believe that a sentient being created itself out of nothingness.

It's funny you should ask this. Religios people have no problem saying that god always existed. Yet they think everything else has a beginning and an end. Perhaps our universe's existence is cyclical. Perhaps our universe will become what was there before the "big bang". Then we will have another "big bang". It's my wild uneducated guess. We don't know but it is as possible as any religious explanation I have heard.

Can anyone tell me what the biggest number is? Can anyone tell me what the biggest negative number is?

 

[oracle25]

Nonsense. There's no god, and there's no god reason to pretend otherwise.

Seeking to deny God is quite normal.

Why you people feel the need to invent one I discussed earlier,

:2funny: Invent one? Please, learn basic logic. :2rofll:

but you people really should, in the interests of public health, not try so hard to spread you disease to others.

Hmm, lets see, 90+% of the world has a religion. 10-% percent of the world does not, and were the ones with a mental disease? As I said, learn logic.

 

[justone]

Keep guessing. Someday you'll figure out it's not a religion, it's a philosophy.

I am really afraid there is a continious misreading of my guesses. I apologise for reposting almost the same thing, put I hope I am making more clear.You can call it a philosophy. Whatever works for you

Guess #1
The dictionary definitions of atheism and religion don’t answer the question.

Guess#2
Sooner or later a human has to leave protection of parents and rent an apartment.
The human gets busy with making his own living.
In the minutes of rest, sooner or later, with more or less clarity, he has to face 3 furious questions:

1. Where did he come from?
2. Where is he going?
3. How to get there in one piece.

He wants to shake these questions off, he often cannot give a clear account of their existance, he cannot express them in words, but he has to answer them, because they are a part of a human being. He uses his intuition, he looks in dictionaries, watches the event on TV or joins crowds on the stadium; analyses, what he was taught by parents and teachers, conducts his own experiments, drinks beer, - does at lest one of all these things, searching for his answer.
Sometimes the process can take 2 minutes, sometimes it can take 20 years, butSooner or later he builds a system of knowledge, emotions, science, experience, intuition, inheritance, empty bottles, and whatever works, - the system which puts him in more or less stable and peaceful position towards the troubling questions; so he can continue his way to where he goes. Thus his religion is born. Now he can call it Christianity, or philoshophy,he can even call it atheism and prove, that it is not a religion. It's OK - whatever works for him.

 

[oracle25]

A new born has no religion so is therefore by definition an atheist.

Even if I were to accept that a new born has no "religion", he would really be an agnostic. Of course I believe that babies no God at birth.

Wonder and curiosity of nature are natural.

Why?

Belief in a supernatural being or beings along with sets of rules are not.

This goes against every shred of evidence there is on the matter.

I truly do not believe in a god.

Yes you do.

No not everyone is drawn to something higher.

Yes they are. This is not to say that some do not hide this well, but everyone is drawn to something higher.

The limitations you place on yourself are not universal.

No, but they are global.

I think a more accurate phrase would be " Everyone knows there is no god, but they are afraid to face the reality so they invent gods to comfort themselves."

Hmm, I wish there was a logical thought in this statement.

 

[oracle25]

It's funny you should ask this. Religios people have no problem saying that god always existed. Yet they think everything else has a beginning and an end.

This is because (at least the God I serve) exists outside space, time, and the laws of physics. The universe, obviously, does not.

Perhaps our universe's existence is cyclical. Perhaps our universe will become what was there before the "big bang". Then we will have another "big bang". It's my wild uneducated guess. We don't know but it is as possible as any religious explanation I have heard.

If that is true, and you believe it, the only logical conclusion that you can reach is that religion could be true.

 

[justone]

My belief in atheism has nothing to do with my belief in science. It more has to do with the fact that I find it completely stupid that there is some allmighty God up there who controls everything.

As a Christian I completely agree with each of your words.

So, what is the difference between you and me, if I came to the same conclusion once and I still stand on it with all my heart?

The difference is that you stopped thinking at this point, because you realized that such thought immediately put you in the category of atheists, and you feel comfortable over there.

I kept on doubting myself. You remember my wish to you was– doubt everything, including me and including yourself. Please.

Let me you give a simplified example of me doubting myself:
I found your statement is truth. So, what should I think? Should I think that I am in control of everything? I would love to think so. It is such a pleasant thought, that I must stop right there. But I am not satisfied with such answer. I know I am in control of everything. Often I cannot control even myself.

So, maybe an accident or absurd (means no control), is in control? Well, it may be not such a bad thought for somebody, but it’s quite stupid for me. What is the difference between God and an accident for me personally? Both are stupid. Actually, for me, accident and absurd are a hair more humiliating. Makes me feel like a piece of shi-t floating on waves. I just don’t like to have no control. So, looking at others: should I go to the Church, sing, shout, get exalted, get high and get some feeling of control, - I shall ask and He will give? Sunday – dance - shout – ask- receive- happy -works? Works for millions. But it normally happens once week, what am I going to do on other days? I mean, - once a week I can as well smoke some pot and get high and exalted and happy. Friday – liquor store – party - drunk – happy? What is the difference? And here another question comes: whom should I shout to, - Allah, Christ, Buddha, almighty Zeus? What is the tribe I should dance with around the fire? What is the difference?

Everything is stupid and none of the above satisfies my questions. I am not in control (which the most important for me), almighty Zeus is not, accident is not, there is no control; and the right and the easiest thing to do is just to shake off all these thoughts, and be – what do they call it – an atheist, just live and - whatever, a lot of things are stupid in these world, but I am smart enough to understand that. I don’t even know, why I was thinking about such things. Why do you?

But I continued to doubt my decision and found for myself, that one God was very sympathetic to our statement “” it is completely stupid that there is some almighty God up there who controls everything””. He knew we could not accept such situation. So, he did not forget to say just one phrase, which answered all the questions. I just had missed the phrase – only now it looks so obvious to me, that I cannot believe I missed it. How can I not to love my God who can answer such questions with just one phrase?
I my occupation I have to use laws of science; and in the same way like your atheism does not have anything to do to science; my Faith has nothing to do to science neither. You’re telling me and I am accepting that a human does not exist only in one dimension of science; we are a quite multidimensional thing. Away from my occupation, I have doubted a lot of things in my life. I don’t deny that, because He gave me so many answers to so many furious questions, I find myself completely addicted to His book. It works for me. Whatever works for you is your belief.

Another example is your statement “On the whole human beings want to be good, but not too good, and not quite all the time.” It sounds beautiful and true. But don’t you think, you have to give a definition of “good” and “bad”, some point from which you would measure good and not too good. You can see: what is good for you may not be so good for me, and may mean nothing for somebody else, and somebody falls in between. There should some very short definition, which would be the least bothering to all of us, since we all form a system of human existence and survival. Am I talking about 10 Commandments here, or this is you, who are talking about them? Are you still going to find a book which would offer a shorter and better solution? Keep on looking, there is nothing wrong, many people have been looking for thousands of years. I just don’t have thousands years, to reinvent my own bycicle.

 

[oracle25]

Another example is your statement “On the whole human beings want to be good, but not too good, and not quite all the time.” It sounds beautiful and true.

I have often wanted to address this statement. I think perhaps a more accurate statement (if you examine human actions) would be "On the whole human beings want to be bad, but not too bad, and not quite all the time.". I mean, how often do you have to tell a child to misbehave?

 

[black wolf]

Seeking to deny God is quite normal.



:2funny: Invent one? Please, learn basic logic. :2rofll:



Hmm, lets see, 90+% of the world has a religion. 10-% percent of the world does not, and were the ones with a mental disease? As I said, learn logic.

Ok, logic then. Of those 90% (source?), who worships the right deity or deities?

 

[Thorgasm]

This is because (at least the God I serve) exists outside space, time, and the laws of physics. The universe, obviously, does not.



If that is true, and you believe it, the only logical conclusion that you can reach is that religion could be true.

Your earlier posts about "learning logic" were hilarious. Perhaps you could brush up on logic fallacies.

My universe is cyclical example was to show you how making a wild claim without one shred of proof to back it up is absurd. The only logical conclusion is that religion is just as absurd. I notice how you didn't answer what was the largest positive and negative numbers. This is why you don't understand physics. Not all things have a beginning and an end.

 

[justone]

I have often wanted to address this statement. I think perhaps a more accurate statement (if you examine human actions) would be "On the whole human beings want to be bad, but not too bad, and not quite all the time.". I mean, how often do you have to tell a child to misbehave?

it's a little bit confusing to me : do you want to be bad or you want to be a child?
Bad boy, bad boy...

 

[AlbqOwl]

Independent Thinker writes

Not all things have a beginning and an end.

See? You do believe in God.

That in itself does not make you religious. But acknowledging the obvious is a good first step. :smile:

 

[i believe in tranquility]

god has no end.....according to people who beilve in God (myself included)

 

[oracle25]

Your earlier posts about "learning logic" were hilarious. Perhaps you could brush up on logic fallacies.

I have a very deep understanding of logic.

My universe is cyclical example was to show you how making a wild claim without one shred of proof to back it up is absurd.

Why? You do that same thing almost every day. You have done it at least three times in this paragraph.

The only logical conclusion is that religion is just as absurd.

Whenever somebody makes the claim that "logically religion is absurd" I make them answer a simple question. How do you apply the three basic laws of thought (the basis of all logical thought) to your conclusion?

Logically, the only conclusion that I can reach (applying the three laws of thought) is that a universe which exists completely on logic and order must have come from a being that is logical and orderly. Order does not arise from disorder (actually the opposite is the case) so there must be a creator.

I notice how you didn't answer what was the largest positive and negative numbers.

That is because it is 1) irrelevant, and 2) illogical.

irrelevant because it has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about. And illogical because there is no "highest" number, you can always add more on to it, so the question itself is moot.

This is why you don't understand physics.

Perhaps I don't understand physics. But I doubt this is because I know that there is no such thing as a highest number.

Not all things have a beginning and an end.

Within the laws of nature they do. Notice you have just made a wild claim without one shred of proof to back it up.

 

[FluffyNinja]

No, you can't prove that something doesn't exist, only that it does. But until god is proven to exist, I, myself, will believe that man created god as the first form of science and government.

Hey, look! The quintessential "atheist" just got caught. He actually said that he BELIEVED in something, and something which cannot be proven I might add. Can he PROVE that man created God? I don't think so, yet he clearly states that he BELIEVES in this.:lol:

 

[Apostle13]

Hey, look! The quintessential "atheist" just got caught. He actually said that he BELIEVED in something, and something which cannot be proven I might add. Can he PROVE that man created God? I don't think so, yet he clearly states that he BELIEVES in this.:lol:

No, you can't prove that something doesn't exist, only that it does. But until god is proven to exist, I, myself, will believe that man created god as the first form of science and government.

Smells like religion to me..:lol:

 

[Thorgasm]

Independent Thinker writes


See? You do believe in God.

That in itself does not make you religious. But acknowledging the obvious is a good first step. :smile:

Aren't you the funny one? :lol:

 

[Thorgasm]

I have a very deep understanding of logic.

Well your brand of "logic" is a curious one.

Why? You do that same thing almost every day. You have done it at least three times in this paragraph.

3 times huh? :lol:

Whenever somebody makes the claim that "logically religion is absurd" I make them answer a simple question. How do you apply the three basic laws of thought (the basis of all logical thought) to your conclusion?

Because people are known liars and storytellers. That is a much more reasonable conclusion than "leaps of faith" are.

Logically, the only conclusion that I can reach (applying the three laws of thought) is that a universe which exists completely on logic and order must have come from a being that is logical and orderly. Order does not arise from disorder (actually the opposite is the case) so there must be a creator.

A creator is not logical.

That is because it is 1) irrelevant, and 2) illogical.

It is something that has no end. It is even part of nature.

irrelevant because it has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about. And illogical because there is no "highest" number, you can always add more on to it, so the question itself is moot.

Not moot, proof. There are things that have no beginning or end.

Perhaps I don't understand physics. But I doubt this is because I know that there is no such thing as a highest number.

It shows the concept of infinity. Of course this could be done with algebra.

Within the laws of nature they do. Notice you have just made a wild claim without one shred of proof to back it up.

Mathematics is well within the laws of nature.

 

[Thorgasm]

Hey, look! The quintessential "atheist" just got caught. He actually said that he BELIEVED in something, and something which cannot be proven I might add. Can he PROVE that man created God? I don't think so, yet he clearly states that he BELIEVES in this.:lol:

People are known liars and storytellers. This is my proof.