Atheist's, what got you to your atheism?

slippy said:
If there is some sort of supreme entity (the thing we call God/Allah/Jehovah/etc) then the last thing I'm going to use as a yardstick for his existence is the behaviour of some other flawed human, whether he's a Pope, Grand Mufti or a beggar in the street.
Click to expand...

What would you use as a yard stick then? Some of the stories in the bible and the 10 commandments seem quite contradictory. The 10 commandments seem quite contradictory in themselves.
 
slippy said:
Similarly, some of you are judging Christianity by the acts of the Catholic church. There are multitudes of Catholic beliefs that directly contradict the bible, so I don't think it's reasonable to hold Catholicism up as the perfect example of Christianity.

If there is some sort of supreme entity (the thing we call God/Allah/Jehovah/etc) then the last thing I'm going to use as a yardstick for his existence is the behaviour of some other flawed human, whether he's a Pope, Grand Mufti or a beggar in the street.
Click to expand...

Its very true that religious groups can do great things, but so much lousy stuff has been done in their name its very hard to weigh up any actual intrinsic worth. Even ignoring any history from crusades, inquisition etc etc, if we looked at religion as it currently stands this century how much value does it really have for humanity? The value it does have could probably be filled with a more rational and less bigoted and REAL way of thinking and social grouping if there was a void to fill if there were suddenly no religions.... however this would require improved education.

A fundamental flaw with it is that it is all a fantasy story, which to build any thing of any value on is a pretty darn shakey foundation.
 
No argument from me that religion as a concept has very shaky credibility. But religion is a human construct that is a separate issue to the existence of a god. If there is a god I see him slapping his forehead at the behaviour of humans, especially those who claim to have a monopoly on knowing him through their religion.

It's hard to know what makes a good yardstick for the nature/existence of a god, but religion sure isn't a good one.
 
slippy said:
No argument from me that religion as a concept has very shaky credibility. But religion is a human construct that is a separate issue to the existence of a god. If there is a god I see him slapping his forehead at the behaviour of humans, especially those who claim to have a monopoly on knowing him through their religion.

It's hard to know what makes a good yardstick for the nature/existenc of a god,, but religion sure isn't a good one.
Click to expand...

That is true and pretty much separates it into the two issues of man made religions of which there are hundreds all of various value and worth socially at different times.

Existence of a god (or gods) is another issue, usually closely tied with people's religion. Without exposure to religion how many people would still believe in a god? God filled the void on knowledge in the past, while now we have really two fundamental questions, what caused the big bang and what made life start from no life. However God really doesn't do any satisfactory answering on those topics so realistically god is a baggage from the past rather than any viable solution and most likely would not be created by humans again in any recognisable form if god was removed from humanities knowledge base.
 
Moggio said:
Its very true that religious groups can do great things, but so much lousy stuff has been done in their name its very hard to weigh up any actual intrinsic worth. Even ignoring any history from crusades, inquisition etc etc, if we looked at religion as it currently stands this century how much value does it really have for humanity? The value it does have could probably be filled with a more rational and less bigoted and REAL way of thinking and social grouping if there was a void to fill if there were suddenly no religions.... however this would require improved education.

A fundamental flaw with it is that it is all a fantasy story, which to build any thing of any value on is a pretty darn shakey foundation.
Click to expand...
There's any number of studies that show that, as a whole, non believers are more generous, and do more for the community than religious people....and they do it because they feel it's the right thing to do, not out of a fear of a Sky Daddy.
 
Stephen Hawkings wife apparently had a conversation with him about the Big Bang where she asked him what happened before the Big Bang and what set it off. Stephen apparently answered that it was impossible to know as all the laws of physics break down at that point, to which she replied "Good, so there is still room for a God". A point he couldn't refute.
 
slippy said:
Stephen Hawkings wife apparently had a conversation with him about the Big Bang where she asked him what happened before the Big Bang and what set it off. Stephen apparently answered that it was impossible to know as all the laws of physics break down at that point, to which she replied "Good, so there is still room for a God". A point he couldn't refute.
Click to expand...

Yeah definately, there is always room. But you don't have to be hawking level IQ to understand that a prophet did not slice the moon, another did not walk on water and that there is actually not multi armed elephant dude controlling the world.
 
slippy said:
Stephen Hawkings wife apparently had a conversation with him about the Big Bang where she asked him what happened before the Big Bang and what set it off. Stephen apparently answered that it was impossible to know as all the laws of physics break down at that point, to which she replied "Good, so there is still room for a God". A point he couldn't refute.
Click to expand...

The idea of that sort of god with respect to the gods of old is so different as to make the use of the same term pretty much irrelevant. And as we all know we are left with the same problem of what created that "instigator".

Also with physics at the moment the idea of a beginning is becoming blurred, as Hawking said, "what is North of the north pole?", with the idea of a big bang being instigated in empty space due to something like a phase transition in another universe, and many other concepts that actually answer the question (and lead to other new ones), it make a stop gap solution of "god" seem a very unsatisfying excuse for an answer.

moorey said:
There's any number of studies that show that, as a whole, non believers are more generous, and do more for the community than religious people....and they do it because they feel it's the right thing to do, not out of a fear of a Sky Daddy.
Click to expand...

That makes me feel warm and fuzzy!
 
moorey said:
There's any number of studies that show that, as a whole, non believers are more generous, and do more for the community than religious people....and they do it because they feel it's the right thing to do, not out of a fear of a Sky Daddy.
Click to expand...

Would this also give some very religious people an over inflated sense of entitlement? God bequeathed it to me so I don't owe any living being anything for what I have been bequeathed.

Where as the alternative view might be "Don't thank god for it. If he/she exists, he/she had nothing to do with it. It is the result of parts of the preceding 2 million years of human evolution, both successes and failures. It is the challenges and inspiration laid down by your competitors. It is the result of your hard work and the hard work of those who work with you. It is the support of your family and friends. Thank them."

I am not saying it can only be one way or the other, but with religion you end up thanking a deity, ignoring the efforts of the people who really did the heavy lifting. Where as non believers may be more inclined to recognise the efforts of the people who did the heavy lifting.
 
moorey said:
There's any number of studies that show that, as a whole, non believers are more generous, and do more for the community than religious people....and they do it because they feel it's the right thing to do, not out of a fear of a Sky Daddy.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there are any number of studies that are inverse to your claim. As well.
 
While we're talking anecdotal. Same for me.

I could go out right now and survey a random sample of people and construct the questions to get the result I want. Of course done ethically and within the guiding principles of survey design.

I don't think I'd trust anything but ABS data on religion coupled tax deductible donations from ATO. If there is something on that scale I will eat my Quran.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top