DonnyTJS Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Atheism exists as a calculated belief as a consequence of the lack of evidence in the existence of God/Gods If there was no religious teaching/dictating to the young neither a belief in Gods and consequently Atheism would exist. Atheism is not a faith .It is learned behavior based on reasoned evidence.Faith is belief without the need for evidence Switch your terms: 'theism' for 'atheism' and you get the same argument. Reasoned evidence for theism? What's the prime mover? Cause and effect are fairly fundamental to rational thought, so what's the first cause, the primum mobile? Reason has nowt to do with it, it's a matter of verifiable proof, and none can exist by the very nature of the concepts involved. So both stances are based on faith. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just that some people tend to get a bit shirty when it's pointed out. As I said, I'll stick with Sartre. This conversation we are having is the exact same as the chicken or egg which came first conversation. The answer is neither, the real question is what invented both at the same time. (If you say they both simultaneously invented each other, randomly, that is ok... ). Y'know: we had this exact same discussion years ago. Flat Earth was involved as well which obviously took it to a whole new level. I think I posited an island on which a baby was raised by a mute robot. It's why any putative Mowgli - a child wandering out of the jungle supposedly raised by monkeys (or, more commonly, a child that has been kept locked up by its parents with no communication for years) - is the holy grail of researchers from any number of disciplines. Anyroad, ek_celt - I'm sure he's loving this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wembley67lisbon Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Wtf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cove_Sheep Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Wtf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 This conversation we are having is the exact same as the chicken or egg which came first conversation. The answer is neither, the real question is what invented both at the same time. (If you say they both simultaneously invented each other, randomly, that is ok... ).That ones been answered. The chicken came first and that was before it crossed the road.Unless it was Schroedingers chicken........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringo Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 That ones been answered. The chicken came first and that was before it crossed the road. Unless it was Schroedingers chicken........ Is that the African or European chicken though ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Is that the African or European chicken though ?Laden or unladen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormond Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Laden or unladen? Bin Laden or Un-Binladen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Not sure if agree. There's no belief. You believe in the absence of God/the supernatural. You believe in creation without a creator. You believe in life from non-life. It's a science based factual system. It's a 'scientism' based hypothesis on which one of the cruelest hoaxes in history is based. It is the deception that people want to hear because it offers the lie of not having to be accountable to God. You can't prove that something doesn't exist. When we get right down to it, a person can't prove to another person that they exist. A person (me) can only know that they themselves exist. No it's not. You've just gone on to say that you can't prove the non-existence of God, therefore the question of Her existence or non-existence lies outside scientific discourse. Atheism has to be based on faith. (Hmm... What are you up to?) Everyone is born an atheist. Not a single person is born a "believer". Everyone is born with a 'sin nature' rebellious toward God. Religion / "faith" is a result of human intervention and fostered from childhood. Only if their hearts are receptive to it. I would agree that environment often plays a massive role though. What nonsense you "preach" No, I preach truth. Is there a specific point that you disagree with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Nope, everyone is born with no view either way (and without the capacity to have a view anyway). Our hearts are on the default setting of 'me first' at birth. Atheism, like theism, is acquired; and since neither position is subject to scientific proof, both are forms of faith. Yes. (Keeping my eye on you.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 As an aside the question popped into my mind is there a qualitative difference in belief versus disbelief. Is it more rational to believe in a god or more rational to disbelieve in a god, as a concept without the various creation stories. Since existence (a complexly designed creation) exists... from which the posed question comes (no less)... then I'd say that the rational favouring the Designer would be an extremely lopsided one. (Something along the lines of 100% certainty to 0% doubt.) And all because ek_celt hasn't posted for a few days ... (he was logged on earlier, I noticed). He better not interrupt. Science can never prove that something doesn't exist. You can only put forward your theory based on the evidence and provable facts. Evolution relies heavily on unproven 'facts'. So, I can't prove God doesn't exist and Scotty can't prove he does. I can show you that He does, and you can prove it to yourself by not to others. (It's been brilliantly set up that way.) The evidence supports my theory over his, in my opinion. It doesn't, but keep in mind that my faith will be proven to you and that your hypothesis (by it's very nature) can never become theorem. This means you are effectively born atheist i.e. you are born without a belief in God. That's not what atheist means though. Since we aren't born with knowledge of God we wouldn't have the capacity to knowingly reject Him either. What you and others are confusing is when it is said people "become" atheist. You think that this means it is an acquired belief. It is not. It is simply rejecting the teaching and influence of others preaching faith and religion. Religion is an acquired belief. A person can subscribe to or change to any worldview. For example... A muslim can 'become' Roman Catholic, and a Roman Catholic can 'become' atheist. God has taken over his thread. We have this 'meaning of life' discussion every now and then on the TAMB. The normal fluff which holds no eternal value will resume soon enough 'Tis not a point scoring exercise, surely? Or are you living by the eye for an eye mantra? I was trying to be funny. I have never felt 'battered' on here. It's proving a negative that is thorny. I don't see that at all. Everything that is designed has a designer. Everything that is created has a Creator. Life only comes from life. It's what we already know (except when we don't want to know it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 That's my point. If God did exist there'd be some provable testable evidence. No. You're not getting this. Not if you factor in the concept of 'Free Will'. If God allowed His existence to be confirmed through "provable, testable evidence", then the whole 'turning to God in an act of free will' would be buggered. It'd be breaking the rules of the game... Thank you! Proof eliminates faith. No faith, then no Salvation through Grace. Jesus said to him (Doubting Thomas), “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have NOT seen and yet have believed.” John 20:29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Hence the term "blind faith ". My faith isn't blind. I can SEE creation. If God existed and was omnipotent and omnipresent then surely he'd stop some of the suffering of the children on this world? The temporary suffering isn't caused by God, but it is allowed by God. Sin, for the elimination of doubt, is being allowed to be brought to it's natural conclusion of total destruction. He can't find a paedophile sinful if he has allowed him to perpetrate his evil and not stopped it. He can. Would you stand and watch a child being abused if you could stop it? No, but I'm not God. He has the big picture to mesh with all the little pictures. As for asking why if God exists does God permit the suffering of children, animals, anything...Maybe this world is not about God presenting you with perfection for your pleasure, maybe it is about presenting you with a world that is equally full of bad as it is good and then letting you find out who you are. Our story is paradise, paradise lost through sin, an increasingly fallen world, a Loving Saviour, reconciliation, and paradise regained (for anyone that wants it). First off the arguments I have made were in response to Scotty's assertion "atheism is still a faith-based belief system". Which it is. In your case, you believe without knowing (or having any way of knowing). A child reared free of human influence would have no concept of language and therefore would be incapable of realizing the human potential for any form of higher thought. We think in words. Do we think instinctively? Did primitive man have no thoughts? The idea you have of 'primitive man' never existed. Can a concept exist before the language develops to express it? I suspect it goes hand in hand. What if language didn't develop but was given? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GRBear Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Can we stop the petty arguing about feckin religion!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 There aren't any. We're having a very interesting conversation that includes, thought, language, etc. (I can PM you with any EK Celt updates if the thread is beyond your comfort zone.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redstevie007 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 F*ck me, come back EK, we miss you..., Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 My faith isn't blind. I can SEE creation. The temporary suffering isn't caused by God, but it is allowed by God. Sin, for the elimination of doubt, is being allowed to be brought to it's natural conclusion of total destruction. He can. No, but I'm not God. He has the big picture to mesh with all the little pictures. Our story is paradise, paradise lost through sin, an increasingly fallen world, a Loving Saviour, reconciliation, and paradise regained (for anyone that wants it). Which it is. In your case, you believe without knowing (or having any way of knowing). Do we think instinctively? The idea you have of 'primitive man' never existed. What if language didn't develop but was given? So God is punishing all mankind for the sin of Eve (according to the bible) thousands of years ago? Bit spiteful really and not very Christian of him.He's also a hypocrite of the worst kind in that he allows innocents to suffer and diewhilst being able to prevent it but says we should protect the innocent. I'd type more but I'm on my phone and the user interface hasn't evolved enough for my fat fingers! It also seems we are disturbing the Force of the TAMB with our existential debate. Folk even think we're arguing. I never argue about religion, it's a waste of time. If someone has real faith then by definition you can't change their mind. My spidey sense tells me you have real faith. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMcoolJ Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 So God is punishing all mankind for the sin of Eve (according to the bible) thousands of years ago? Bit spiteful really and not very Christian of him. He's also a hypocrite of the worst kind in that he allows innocents to suffer and diewhilst being able to prevent it but says we should protect the innocent. I'd type more but I'm on my phone and the user interface hasn't evolved enough for my fat fingers! It also seems we are disturbing the Force of the TAMB with our existential debate. Folk even think we're arguing. I never argue about religion, it's a waste of time. If someone has real faith then by definition you can't change their mind. My spidey sense tells me you have real faith. God gave you fat fingers so you couldn't bad mouth him on your iPhone..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMcoolJ Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 "It's a 'scientism' based hypothesis on which one of the cruelest hoaxes in history is based. It is the deception that people want to hear because it offers the lie of not having to be accountable to God." Scotty - this is the very sort of thing that freaks me out. Do you honestly (honestly) believe that science is a hoax?? My wee sister is very religous. Every so often her and her husband have a pop at me. Always ends with her getting upset because I call religion her hobby, whereas mine is now golf. For various ocassions (important to them), i've been dragged to church. I can see right through it. Maybe I'm the devil incarnate, but it's all so false and absolutely nonsensical. The one thing that gets to me, is that the place is full of intelligent people - what are they thinking?? Is this an insurance policy, or do they actually believe this (and that science in a hoax)? This part baffles me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishcumnock Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 He's a very naughty boy ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Ek Celt to God. Seems reasonable . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goozay Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Ek Celt to God. Seems reasonable . . . Can it be proved that he's not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Can it be proved that he's not? We just need to find out what school he went to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMcoolJ Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Ek Celt to God. Seems reasonable . . . Well, look what happened to Kurt Cobain..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Well, look what happened to Kurt Cobain..... Ek's been killed by his wife? . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMcoolJ Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Ek's been killed by his wife? . . . Courtney killed Kurt?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.