Topic: I Have A Few Questions For The Atheists

What things in life inspire you?  What cause would you die for?  How deeply do you love?

Religion as the philosophical foundation of Love.  Lawl. 

It's not a trick question.  I'm just curious.

If someone in my circle rolled their eyes at me as much as you do, I wouldn't have anything to do with them.  It just further reinforces the fact that your questions are loaded. Anyway...

...in my own case I have been on a philosophical pursuit of the question of love and have read a few things.  Right now I am reading Kierkegaard's Works of Love...

 


Okay well what has Kierkagaard taught you so far?

What things in life inspire you?  What cause would you die for?  How deeply do you love?

Because I am  an atheist, I am inspired by greed and personal gain. Because I am an atheist, I would not die for anything because I am the most important thing in the world.  Because I am an atheist, I do not love.

What things in life inspire you?  What cause would you die for?  How deeply do you love?

Because I am  an atheist, I am inspired by greed and personal gain. Because I am an atheist, I would not die for anything because I am the most important thing in the world.  Because I am an atheist, I do not love.

I think everyone is inspired by greed and personal gain to some degree.

You are the most important thing in the world above any other thing correct.

Well you do love yourself or the first two wouldn't apply.

What things in life inspire you?  What cause would you die for?  How deeply do you love?

Because I am  an atheist, I am inspired by greed and personal gain. Because I am an atheist, I would not die for anything because I am the most important thing in the world.  Because I am an atheist, I do not love.

Are you being serious here?  Your statements actually make logical sense, at least if you start out with your situation.  I think that love is the only thing which could make a person sacrifice himself or herself for another person or a cause.  But sacrifice, of course, leads to the death of the self, the ultimate (and last) thing of value to the atheist (because there is no afterlife in his belief).  So it seems that to love opens oneself up to the possibility of sacrifice, and so not loving at all is safer than loving at all.

Anyway this is a conclusion that could possibly be drawn...I'm not sure that the argument is actually followed but it is interesting nonetheless.

  I think that love is the only thing which could make a person sacrifice himself or herself for another person or a cause.

Thats why this is the definition of love!

I thought I knew love until I held my infant and he turned blue from sudden infant death.  At that moment love had died and when I revived him, and he breathed again; love was resurrected.  I never hurt so bad and then felt so alive as being a mother and going through that moment.  My desperate love for that little baby was overwhelming.

 Now, that he is 18 and enlisted in the Marines, I find that his choice is to give that same life away to protect what he loves and holds dear. Love comes in many degrees, but that moment defined it for me and continues to add to that definition daily.  I would say that the love of a parent, towards that child, and the love to give that child up for the good of many is the most powerful love. 

That is why we don't see God as the dicotomy others do who can not accept him.  For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever, believeth in him should not perrish but have everlasting life. 

Wow, Donna. That must have been absolutely frightening.  Thank God (seriously) nothing like that ever happened with my kids.  I would have freaked out.

Glad to hear he's a Marine too. Sounds like you have a good kid. (is he a Christian too?)
Has he ever gone over there to the Mid East? 

Tell him I said Thank You!

That is why we don't see God as the dicotomy others do who can not accept him.

Could you elaborate on this more?

I will pass along the wonderful thank you.

 He is a Christian.  He struggles with some things though.

 I have studied prophecy and talked to my kids so much about it that he runs a little from God now.  The reason, is not what you think.  It is understandable.  He does not run because his faith is low or small.  He has such faith that he knows for certain that we are in End Times and Jesus is getting ready to return. 

He just wants to live and love and be a man and have his chance to live before the Rapture or Second Return of Christ.  So, I don't blame him.  Heck, I felt the same way as a senior and youth group leader of my church.  I wanted to graduate, go to college, get married, have a home, have babies. If he did not push it away with such fear, I would say he did not believe.

 He was baptized as a fourth grader.  He also had a pretty spectacular experience with God. He saw a hand in the sky that day and for hours freaked me out.  He then said it was multi-colored and that he asked God about it and God told him he was the father of many nations and the colors were the colors of mankind.  I thought he was having a seizure.  Anyhow, he never did anything like that again.

 He has faith enough to fear God.  I explained to my daughter, who thought he no longer was close to God.  I said, "Shannon, if you did not think a bull was in the pasture and ready to chase you, would you run?"  She said no.  I said, "We only run from the thing we are most definite is there."  She asked me why he would fear God.  I said, "He fears that he will come back before he gets to be a man."  She said, Oh that makes sense mom.     
That explains his distance right now.   
               

Also, to answer the other question.  The dicotomy that many have posted lately about a God that seems so cruel and so intent on Hell and torment and such.  I have such a different relationship with him than that, but if I were an unbeliever I may not get to experience the other side.  That is what I meant.

               

Also, to answer the other question.  The dicotomy that many have posted lately about a God that seems so cruel and so intent on Hell and torment and such.  I have such a different relationship with him than that, but if I were an unbeliever I may not get to experience the other side.  That is what I meant.

  Thing is, many atheists WERE believers and still saw god as being evil and cruel.

People make far too many assumptions about our experiences at atheists!

True.  Assumptions are what they are until they are clarified.

 You guys do a good job and it is appreciated, but some people never clarify on here or answer questions.  I think the moderators know who as the rest of us.  I just wish we could reach a better understanding .

 I am starting to get some better ideas, but this double standard does need to fade as we begin to really research all this.  If we really do understand something we can formulate a true opinion.  My problem is all this research and data about something you guys say does not exist. I just have a hard time with that.  If a scientist walked up to me with volumes of data on something he did not believe in and said that "factually" the "evidence" was in that God not exist, I think I would have to laugh myself to death.

 However, faith, based on some facts that support that "faith", is more credible.  It is faith we say saves us, which is evidence of the unseen.  We don't claim anything else.  We may argue it and that is all we can do until he comes back. Faith is the foundation for salvation.

I dont think any atheist has data and research on how god doesnt exist.

Usually the "research and data" we have is about when religion tries to mingle in science. (human origins, evolution, etc...)

 The only evidence we have god doesnt exist is a total lack of evidence FOR his existence.

However, faith, based on some facts that support that "faith", is more credible.  It is faith we say saves us, which is evidence of the unseen.

Actually faith can never be evidence for anything! Faith is merely a mindset. Just because you want something to exist, or you think it does doesnt make it so.

  I think that love is the only thing which could make a person sacrifice himself or herself for another person or a cause.

Thats why this is the definition of love!

That is not the definition of love, you are becoming far too liberal in your definitions.

I dont think any atheist has data and research on how god doesnt exist.

Usually the "research and data" we have is about when religion tries to mingle in science. (human origins, evolution, etc...)

 The only evidence we have god doesnt exist is a total lack of evidence FOR his existence.

However, faith, based on some facts that support that "faith", is more credible.  It is faith we say saves us, which is evidence of the unseen.

Actually faith can never be evidence for anything! Faith is merely a mindset. Just because you want something to exist, or you think it does doesnt make it so.

Sorry, you confuse what the requirements for what proof is, evidence, and faith.  You attempt to use a scientific definition for proof as the ultimate definition for proof.  Science was never intended to prove, or disprove the existence of God.  It was only intended to prove or disprove things that could be explained scientifically.

To prove something does not mean it it is true.  It was once proven scientifically that the earth was the center of the universe.  That scientific proof was later proved to be false.

Proof is nothing more than evidence something is true.  That is true whether you use the term in math, science, or the court system.  In the court system, it might be "proven beyond reasonable doubt" that a person is guilty.  That does not mean it is really true the person is guilty.  Same with science proving the earth was the center of the universe.

The fact that the great majority of people believe in a god is evidence, or proof that god exists.  There is no reason to try to prove something absolutely using science, because sciense has been proven wrong in the past.

So why would anyone care to take up the misguided challenge to prove something through a system that was never intended to prove, or disprove, that truth?

Sorry, you confuse what the requirements for what proof is, evidence, and faith.  You attempt to use a scientific definition for proof as the ultimate definition for proof.  Science was never intended to prove, or disprove the existence of God.  It was only intended to prove or disprove things that could be explained scientifically.

Actually, as i said over at www.njc-njo.com (cheap plug) proof isnt what science does. It is only used to describe the natural world, god is outside the natural world, so science can not be used.

HOWEVER many christians like to ins
ert their religion into the real of science. (ie creation, great flood, etc...) and thats where much of the controversy lies.

but we still have tools (logic) that can analyze the idea of a god and the supernatural.

To prove something does not mean it it is true.  It was once proven scientifically that the earth was the center of the universe.  That scientific proof was later proved to be false.

Actually it was never "proven" and since the scientific method was not used, we cant equate your statement to modern science.

Proof is nothing more than evidence something is true.  That is true whether you use the term in math, science, or the court system.  In the court system, it might be "proven beyond reasonable doubt" that a person is guilty.  That does not mean it is really true the person is guilty.  Same with science proving the earth was the center of the universe.

But, once again, science doesnt claim proof. As I said before, only math and vodka deal with proof. As for the courts, it still has a disclaimer.

The fact that the great majority of people believe in a god is evidence, or proof that god exists.  There is no reason to try to prove something absolutely using science, because sciense has been proven wrong in the past.

this is a logical fallacy. Many people believed the earth was the center of the universe, but that doesnt make it true.

Science has been wrong, but it corrects itself. Religion claim the ultimate authority and rarely allows itself to be corrected.

So why would anyone care to take up the misguided challenge to prove something through a system that was never intended to prove, or disprove, that truth?

I agree.

HOWEVER, religion must also back away from staking the claims of knowing the natural world as its trying to use something (religion) that cant prove or disprove that truth.

What things in life inspire you?  What cause would you die for?  How deeply do you love?

Greetings,

Let me quickly introduce myself since this is my first post on the site. My name is Bryce. I live in Canada. My parents are "non-practicing" Catholics. Or maybe casual is a better description. I was made to go to a catholic church every sunday as a child. I was forced to go to sunday school and completed communion & confirmation. My parents were both aware that I never had any belief in any type of god all during this time. I was still polite when I went and tried to get in to it (having all of my friends and family at the time some form of christian). After completing confirmation my father and I had a long talk about "faith" and he told me that he didn't really believe in the stories in the NT, but that he thought they were good for teaching morals. He did however believe in a creator (just not one he could describe). Anyway, he told me I needed to investigate all of the information available and make my own choice. He offered me several materials on the worlds religions (including those that had died out long ago). I read them with an open mind. My conclusion was the same...no such thing as the supernatural. No need. So I've been an atheist my entire life.

(Sorry about the lengthy intro, but I thought I should give some background as my introduction)

To your questions:

I am inspired by and have been inspired by many things. I'm inspired to work out and eat healthy because I wish to live as long as I can and as healthy as I can. I'm inspired when I listen to Mozart or when I read Carl Sagan. (and yes, I know Mozart was a believer - if a bit of a sinner in his private life - but that has nothing to do with the inspiration) I'm inspired by the great friends and family I have around me. Honestly, just being alive is an inspiration. If I had to pinpoint the one thing that inspires me most it would be that I will one day be gone. Cease to exist. Everyone of my thoughts, dreams and wishes will be as if they never existed (with the exception of through the memories of my friends & family). So I am inspired to do everything I've every wanted to do while I'm here on earth. I'm inspired to be nice to the people I care about the most and the people I may not know but who are decent fellow humans. I hope that I've been a good enough friend to all of them that when I do pass, they remember something I did or said or maybe they just think of things in a different way (a positive way) and that I in some way helped that. I wish this the most for my 13 year old son.

What cause would I die for? Hmmmm...that's a pretty tough question. I wouldn't go out of my way to die for any reason because I know this is my one shot at life and after I'm done I'll just be gone. So as you can guess, I take life and sustaining it pretty seriously. I think since I had my son and since I've been married my answer to this question has...evolved (sorry, had to!  ) I can give you an example of times I have given up my life for something/someone else. I once encountered a group of 5 skin heads beating on a small black young man. I was driving with an ex of mine and I had to stop because I thought they were going to kill him. I'm a big guy (around 6'6 and 250ish lbs) and I know how to handle myself, but I knew that by getting out of the car I'd have a fair chance of being over powered and possibly killed. I didn't think I could live with myself if I opened the paper the next day and found out this kid (he was about my sons age now) had died at these thugs hands and knowing I may have been able to stop it. My gf at the time begged me not to go but I did. Would I now? Possibly. I'd have a lot more to think about though. My son has some special needs and since his birth mother abandoned him multiple times when he was very young and eventually died of cancer, he's really dependant on me. Back to the question...if you want a graniose answer I would say that if I knew for a fact by giving up my life aids would be cure on earth...I would. If I knew for a fact that by giving up my life massacres in places like Sudan would stop, I would. If any of the 4 closest people to me needed a vital organ transplant and I knew I would most likely die from it...I would. But again...I'd much rather live and don't spend all that much time thinking about dying and what I'd be willing to die for. Living life is just so much better. 

I'm not sure how one would answer the question "How deeply do you love?" I'll assume you mean love people, but if it were a more general question of love in general I'd have to say I am a pretty passionate and emotional man. I've always tried to live my life by the famous quote "Dance like there's nobody watching, Love like you'll never get hurt, Sing like there's nobody listening..." -William W. Purkey

That's how I love the people around me. Like loving something can never hurt. And we all know that it can including me. But if you love like you know this, you probably won't have as happy a life.

Anyway, thanks for the questions and I look forward to talking with and debating some of you in the future if it's welcome.

Cheers,

Bryce aka Godless Raven

True.  Assumptions are what they are until they are clarified.

 You guys do a good job and it is appreciated, but some people never clarify on here or answer questions.  I think the moderators know who as the rest of us.  I just wish we could reach a better understanding .

 I am starting to get some better ideas, but this double standard does need to fade as we begin to really research all this.  If we really do understand something we can formulate a true opinion.  My problem is all this research and data about something you guys say does not exist. I just have a hard time with that.  If a scientist walked up to me with volumes of data on something he did not believe in and said that "factually" the "evidence" was in that God not exist, I think I would have to laugh myself to death.

 However, faith, based on some facts that support that "faith", is more credible.  It is faith we say saves us, which is evidence of the unseen.  We don't claim anything else.  We may argue it and that is all we can do until he comes back. Faith is the foundation for salvation.

Again...no offense, but I'm not sure any of that makes any sense whatsoever. Am I understanding you correctly that you believe having "faith" is "evidence"??

Also, for clarification, when has a scientist every walked up to anybody with tons of evidence against Christianity? I'm pretty sure the arguement for atheism is the exact opposite of that in the sense that there's nothing to prove and no evidence even if there was.

Wait...are you referring to all of science as an argument against christianity or god? In your mind do you literally see a scientist walking up with all of the data from every research field all at once and saying "Go...read that...it proves there's no god"?

It's not like that at all. Everybody is an atheist in some regard as I've yet to meet a person that believes in every god that ever existed or was created. For example, you are surely an atheist towards Allah. To you, there's no evidence (or more acurately, you were born in North America and not in the Middle East) so you have no reason to believe in Allah, and surely the Koran isn't enough to convert you. And guess what? It's likewise for muslims. They are atheists to your christianity. So...since everyone is an atheist to 99.9% of the religions ever created, I'm just somebody who has no qualms about going that extra .1% further. Because again...there's no evidence to lead me to believe any of them.

The reason atheists pull out science in order to refute something like christianity is because science has been tearing down falsehoods about faith's claims regarding the natural world since its inception. Example...flat earth. So if this were hundreds of years ago and you were told the earth was not flat, you would probably use the same arguement you are using now. All the evidence that the earth is not flat or that it revolves around the sun would be evidence for your faith (based on the arugment you posed). Yet...the earth would still be an oblate spheroid. By your arguement the more evidence that pours in helps support  your arguement without evidence. This is where you lose me as far as making sense. The fact that your faith grows stronger as an almost self imposed defense mechanism is impeding your ability to learn as knowledge comes in. I guess if that works for you that's your thing, but I know I could never live that way and I wouldn't want my son developing that learning process. Nor would I wish for his schools to teach that type of method for learning about the natural world.

You seem like a nice enough person. All your rapture talk is a little bothersome though. Does every christian at this particular website believe that end times are inevitable in their life times?

Thanks for the comments Bryce.  I asked my questions because I was curious if atheists and Christians could be motivated in the same way or to the same degree.

 Quote from Godless Raven:
 You seem like a nice enough person. All your rapture talk is a little bothersome though. Does every christian at this particular website believe that end times are inevitable in their life times?
[/quote]

I personally dont believe in the rapture itself. But I think most of us believe we are very close to the end. In our lifetimes? Maybe. But no one knows the very hour it will happen. Even if its 100 years away, after thousnads of years of human history thats no very long.

Example...flat earth.

Do you think this comes from the Bible?  It doesn't. It was man (apart from the Bible. i'e. the scientists of their day) who thought this idea up.
The Bible says the Earth was round.

All your rapture talk is a little bothersome though. Does every christian at this particular website believe that end times are inevitable in their life times?

I believe there will be a Rapture. I'd like it to be in my lifetime, but it may not be. I think there are some Christians who are obsessed with it, so much so that those same Christians think Islam is the antichrist religion and that "this is it" and that's why they won't be happy until Islam is destroyed. (and, unlike what some posters here think..President Bush is not like that) Those types of people disgust me and I think they are wrong (but I could be wrong as well).  I will admit that the Shia belief of the 12th Imam interests me, but that is, to my knowledge, less than 1/4 (if even that) of the multi-billion number of Muslims who adhere to that eschatological belief.

I tend to believe the antichrist will be secular anyway, not any religious leader.  Or maybe a religious belief like Gaia or something.
Al Gore might be the antichrist. 

Example...flat earth.

Do you think this comes from the Bible?  It doesn't. It was man (apart from the Bible. i'e. the scientists of their day) who thought this idea up.

There were no scientists in that day.

The Bible says the Earth was round.

didnt jesse show otherwise?

Example...flat earth.

Do you think this comes from the Bible?  It doesn't. It was man (apart from the Bible. i'e. the scientists of their day) who thought this idea up.

There were no scientists in that day.

The Bible says the Earth was round.

didnt jesse show otherwise?

Jesse parceled terms to justify his thesis.  Four corners of the earth is a figurative and symbolic phrase meaning "everywhere."  It doesn't literally mean "corners" as in a square or rectangle.  I'm rather surprised he didn't understand this myself.

Example...flat earth.

Do you think this comes from the Bible?  It doesn't. It was man (apart from the Bible. i'e. the scientists of their day) who thought this idea up.

There were no scientists in that day.

The Bible says the Earth was round.

didnt jesse show otherwise?

I'm talking the early scientists who thought that.  You know?  Like the ones around during Columbus's time? (or are you going to say they were Christians who ignored science too?  )

Jesse tried, but he didn't prove anything.  He just used some play on words and tried to explain it away, but he was wrong. He only convinced himself I think anyway.  What's in Isaiah and Jeremiah is the Earth is round.  PERIOD.  The prophets knew this long before any scientist did.

Example...flat earth.

Do you think this comes from the Bible?  It doesn't. It was man (apart from the Bible. i'e. the scientists of their day) who thought this idea up.

There were no scientists in that day.

The Bible says the Earth was round.

didnt jesse show otherwise?

Jesse parceled terms to justify his thesis.  Four corners of the earth is a figurative and symbolic phrase meaning "everywhere."  It doesn't literally mean "corners" as in a square or rectangle.  I'm rather surprised he didn't understand this myself.

He also missed (or was incorrect or ignored) the Hebrew translation for the world "orb".

Oh and I almost forgot, that the Greeks also used the four corners of the earth terminology because of the four winds that came from the four corners of the earth.  They assigned gods to these four winds: Boreas, Zephyrus, Eurus, and Notus.  I believe we can chalk this up to the ancients desiring a more poetic way to say "everywhere."  They were rather long winded (pardon the pun) with their language.

Furthermore consider Ezekiel Chapter 1.  Some theologians say Ezekiel is explaining the orbits of the planets and that angels are in charge of overseeing the mechanics of the solar system:

1 Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives by the river of Chebar, that the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God.
2 In the fifth day of the month, which was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin's captivity,
3 The word of the LORD came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the hand of the LORD was there upon him.
4 And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire.
5 Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance; they had the likeness of a man.
6 And every one had four faces, and every one had four wings.
7 And their feet were straight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf's foot: and they sparkled like the colour of burnished brass.
8 And they had the hands of a man under their wings on their four sides; and they four had their faces and their wings.
9 Their wings were joined one to another; they turned not when they went; they went every one straight forward.
10 As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side: and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four also had the face of an eagle.
11 Thus were their faces: and their wings were stretched upward; two wings of every one were joined one to another, and two covered their bodies.
12 And they went every one straight forward: whither the spirit was to go, they went; and they turned not when they went.
13 As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like burning coals of fire, and like the appearance of lamps: it went up and down among the living creatures; and the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning.
14 And the living creatures ran and returned as the appearance of a flash of lightning.
15 Now as I beheld the living creatures, behold one wheel upon the earth by the living creatures, with his four faces.
16 The appearance of the wheels and their work was like unto the colour of a beryl: and they four had one likeness: and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel.
17 When they went, they went upon their four sides: and they turned not when they went.
18 As for their rings, they were so high that they were dreadful; and their rings were full of eyes round about them four.
19 And when the living creatures went, the wheels went by them: and when the living creatures were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up.
20 Whithersoever the spirit was to go, they went, thither was their spirit to go; and the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.
21 When those went, these went; and when those stood, these stood; and when those were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.
22 And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above.
23 And under the firmament were their wings straight, the one toward the other: every one had two, which covered on this side, and every one had two, which covered on that side, their bodies.
24 And when they went, I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of great waters, as the voice of the Almighty, the voice of speech, as the noise of an host: when they stood, they let down their wings.
25 And there was a voice from the firmament that was over their heads, when they stood, and had let down their wings.
26 And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it.
27 And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about.
28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.