I believe in Atheism...

[Flyndaran]

Why is it a leap of faith to believe in ridiculous religions but delusion for EVERY other lunatic idea?

[Jadedcarguy]

Here's something to ponder. Why is it that people who go around spouting off that they believe in (and I apologize for the analogy...but it's the best I could come up with) someone who is more-or-less an "invisible friend" is considered "sane" for the most part.

These same people will call someone like myself foolish or stupid or even worse, just evil for saying, "Ya know, I just don't buy it."

The delusion runs deep.

[Boozy]

Here's something to ponder. Why is it that people who go around spouting off that they believe in (and I apologize for the analogy...but it's the best I could come up with) someone who is more-or-less an "invisible friend" is considered "sane" for the most part. Yet, someone else, who believes in space aliens, and goes on about them with the same fervor, is considered crazy? Why one, and not the other...especially since there's no *absolute* proof that *either* exists?

This is a very good point.

I think the difference between believing in God and believing in aliens is that one is incredibly unlikely based on what we know of the universe and its laws, and one is at least possible based on those same laws. There's no proof of either - and yet if you were to tell me that there will be proof of either God or intelligent alien life within my lifetime, I'd put money on the latter.

Whether or not I think you're crazy for being religious or believing in aliens is another matter. If you say you believe in the Judeo-Christian God, I don't think you're crazy. You've just chosen to take a leap of faith because you find a certain form of spirituality/religion helpful and comforting. But if you say you're the reincarnation of Jesus himself, and are attempting to convert others in preparation for the end of the world on some specific date in the near future, I'd say you're either nuts or a con artist.

Likewise with belief in aliens. If you believe in aliens because you've reflected on the vastness of the universe, of which we have only charted an unimaginably small fraction, and think the odds are good that there are other intelligent life forms out there, then I can respect that. It's a different story if you believe that aliens are probing your anus on a nightly basis.

[Evandril]

Ev... I'd be interested in the definition of Christian then... I only figure it means to believe that JC is the one and only son of the one and only God, and unless you believe in Him and that he sacrificed himself for your immortal soul's entry into heaven (presuming you keep believing that), - then you're a Christian...

You've got something different?

I'd thought, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that you both had to believe that, and *try* to emulate him, and do your best to live according to the 'rules' in the bible. The ones preaching hate from a doctorine based off of love...yeah, not people *I* would call Christian, though they themselves do fairly often.

Protege, another good one...Catholics who believe in saints...as long as it's noone they know. Anyone they know who claims to be a saint tends to be viewed as insane by their 'friends', from my experience. Agreed, though, when you have odds of a billion to one on life existing someplace else...and ten billion other stars...by the odds, that's ten other places with life (All numbers purely imaginary, btw...The one time I looked at the 'odds', though, it was less than the guesstimate of other stars...By a significant amount)

[protege]

Here's something to ponder. Why is it that people who go around spouting off that they believe in (and I apologize for the analogy...but it's the best I could come up with) someone who is more-or-less an "invisible friend" is considered "sane" for the most part. Yet, someone else, who believes in space aliens, and goes on about them with the same fervor, is considered crazy? Why one, and not the other...especially since there's no *absolute* proof that *either* exists?

As for me, well, I'm an agnostic. I simply got tired of having religion forced down my throat growing up. Well, that and being told by various idiots in grade school (a *Catholic* one at that) that I'd never amount to anything, plus being told that I was "going to hell" constantly for various "offenses," etc. meant I'd had enough. Maybe God does exist, maybe he doesn't. Either way, I have bigger things to worry about--getting the bills paid on time, my job, etc.

Believe what you want, but don't attempt to force it down my throat.

[Gabrielle Proctor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTsP_vBuZUM

This was just put on youtube 3 hours ago. Quite a coincidence lol. I was like, "Snap! I found a video about what I was JUST talking about!"

This covers a lot of ground for my position. Even a definition of Atheism for Evandril.

[Gabrielle Proctor]

Could you give me a reference for that, please?

I could give you TONS. You should check out "The Foundational Falsehoods of Christianity" by Aron-ra on youtube. I think he has a video that talks about the topic of this thread. I just don't know which one it is. There are like, 14 of them and I don't have a couple hours of free time to find it.

Keep in mind it's not like anyone told me that most Atheists are like what I just described, I discovered it on my own by being a part of the community. I guess that would be the biggest reference.

Ev... I'd be interested in the definition of Christian then... I only figure it means to believe that JC is the one and only son of the one and only God, and unless you believe in Him and that he sacrificed himself for your immortal soul's entry into heaven (presuming you keep believing that), - then you're a Christian...

You've got something different?

I think he means that a lot of Christians don't practice what they preach.

[Slytovhand]

One small bit to chuck in there...

There may not be a teapot now, but there may be in the future...

Meaning, some sort of Divine Being may have created this universe, and then sodded off. Or is down here walking amongst us, forgotten it's true nature, and has absolutely no idea what's going on.

Or we're just one of many creations, and we've currently been shelved for something with more colours

None of this helps the argument in anyway possible

But... isn't it science's role to disprove theories? (ok, sure, when did science enter this debate...). I don't think anyone has to prove (or disprove) anything. But I do think we all have the brain cells to accept some things when they are blatantly obvious ... (not withstanding the whole 'we are all figments of an imagination' theory).

Ev... I'd be interested in the definition of Christian then... I only figure it means to believe that JC is the one and only son of the one and only God, and unless you believe in Him and that he sacrificed himself for your immortal soul's entry into heaven (presuming you keep believing that), - then you're a Christian...

You've got something different?

[Evandril]

I used to consider myself an Agnostic, because I was under the mistaken impression that Atheists were 100% sure that there weren't any Gods. But, when I started to research, I found out that I was an Atheist even though I wasn't 100% sure God(s) wasn't real.

Could you give me a reference for that, please? Not saying you're wrong, but it does go against what I was taught the word meant, when I was studying Philosophy. I know quite a few people who call themselves atheists don't take that hard of a stance...but I also know quite a few people who call themselves 'christians'....and I'd never give them credit for that title I am weird, though, I tend to enjoy being proven wrong...means I get to learn something new

[Gabrielle Proctor]

All of them require faith. None of them require or have any evidence. Therefore, I would have to entertain the possibility that they all exist.

"Can I prove Zeus does/did not exist? Nope...So I'm neutral on the matter, I've never claimed he does or does not exist. And honestly, I'd be more inclined to believe in Zeus's existance than the Christian god, m'self...Zeus wasn't all powerful, even within the mythos, nor all knowing."

It isn't up to us to disprove God(s). The burden of proof falls on those who make the positive claim for existence(sp?).

I used to consider myself an Agnostic, because I was under the mistaken impression that Atheists were 100% sure that there weren't any Gods. But, when I started to research, I found out that I was an Atheist even though I wasn't 100% sure God(s) wasn't real.

Most Atheists don't have this militant attitude towards the non-existence of God(s). Most of them are pretty sure that God(s) isn't real, but are willing to change their mind when evidence presents itself to support the existence of God(s).

And even though they aren't 100% sure, they aren't going to fall back on God(s) as some kind of default option. It's like a celestial teapot. There could be a teapot orbiting earth right now. It's too small to find and there is no evidence for said teapot. Do I believe in it anyway because it might be there? Nope.

That's pretty much my take on God.

There is no faith required for the non-existence of God(s), just like there is no faith for the non-existence of the celestial teapot.

[Evandril]

Concidering I tossed in one from a fictional book...Nope, but I'd give a loose one as something believed to be a diety...since faith is the issue in question. *shrugs* Be glad to hear a better one Though I would argue if the 'omnipotent' lable is a given, as few gods in history have had that label attached to them...Including some currently worshipped.

[Slytovhand]

Ev.. no, Gab's line.

Oh - did we define 'deity', given that Zeus has now been mentioned? After all, no real reason to believe some being calling itself Zeus, who, compared to the local population, didn't have super amazing magical powers type stuff... and thus got labelled as a 'god'... thus making him a 'deity'... even if he was just an alien.

[Evandril]

But... back to this thread. I don't understand quite why belief in one deity must necessarily mean belief in all. I can understand "I might be wrong, and any number of other options are therefore possible", but maybe I'm just mis-reading you...

If this was directed at my arguements, then I wasn't clear. I'd been saying I personally won't say if any given deity exists or not, not that if you believe in one, you need to believe in them all. Belief is just that, taking something on faith...and if you're doing that, that does not mean you have to take the rest of 'em on faith as well. I was just saying that, to the best of my knowledge, you cannot *disprove* the existance of a diety with the information we have.

Btw, Aethist = There are *no* gods, period, according to all the definitions I've heard. Agnostic = There might be gods, might not be, not going to worry about it. (More definitions for that one, but the 'not worrying about it' part tends to be fairly standard)

[Slytovhand]

Hi Gab... long time and all....

Firstly, twas I who mentioned Einstein's name, and it was indeed in a post in which ID was mentioned. But I didn't say he supported 'it'. I was heading towards the idea that he looked at what he saw and thought that there seems to be rational reason for believing in some form of 'Intelligent Designer'... that it made more sense to him than 'all this' being purely random.

But that's for the ID thread... (which it went to anyway )

And yes, I know it got thrown out it court... strangely, that in itself doesn't actually mean it's wrong! Only that it was unlawful to teach it in science (in particular, biology... which to my way of thinking is a real stupid place for ID'ers to even bother fighting said battle! Their argument makes no sense whatsoever!!) After all, for all we know, what those ID'ers are trying to say was actually the way the universe unfolded!

But... back to this thread. I don't understand quite why belief in one deity must necessarily mean belief in all. I can understand "I might be wrong, and any number of other options are therefore possible", but maybe I'm just mis-reading you...

[Gabrielle Proctor]

Okey dokey, just to chime in here... I don't remember who said it, but let me make a clarification, ahem, EINSTEIN DID NOT SUPPORT INTELLIGENT DESIGN.
This is just like Darwin's "eye quote" which is taken out of context and never expanded upon.

Also, Intelligent design was denounced IN COURT. That's right, the government found that it had absolutely no merit in the court of law. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10545387/

"A six-week trial over the issue yielded “overwhelming evidence” establishing that intelligent design “is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory,” said Jones, a Republican and a churchgoer appointed to the federal bench three years ago."

Also, I do not believe in God(s). I guess that makes me an Atheist. I would be glad to believe in God(s) if there was evidence to support God(s), but there isn't. Also, I can't justify believing in one without entertaining the possibility that all of the other ones are true too.