How Intellectual is Atheism?

[Ronnie T]

God liked the space program "Star Trek", but "Lost in Space"...not so much.

Oh no, I like "Lost in Space".
Back then I thought the little Angela Cartwright was cute.

 

[ToLog]

Twelve men, in my lifetime, have set foot on the Moon. Fourteen others have orbited it. I'd say that is pretty strong evidence supporting the fact.

D

in the Post-Modern Era, in which we find ourselves, ,
having Twelve Humans not only orbiting the Moon, but setting down there, is a profound moment of progress! Yes!

Dr. Michio Kaku (who?) seems to indicate that "machines" will rove the galaxy and beyond, setting down to the surface, and replicating themselves for further adventure, learning, and understanding.

they'll, in short, lay in wait, for other space travelers, then report back to higher HQ for further instructions, once other intelligent Beings arrive and have been identified.

A Universe that is commanded, controlled, and managed by a bunch of Earthlings? how peculiar can the post-modern world become???

 

[PWalls]

Literally thousands have worked for NASA, the .gov space programs and it's vendors. You want to tell me faking a Moon landing was the greatest secret/lie ever to be performed against mankind? And not one person has broken the silence or revealed the lie?

According to some on here, a moon landing conspiracy doesn't hold a candle to Christianity.

 

[charlieboy]

Twelve men, in my lifetime, have set foot on the Moon. Fourteen others have orbited it. I'd say that is pretty strong evidence supporting the fact.

I do not have to personally prove it, as others have done just that already. To include those men who have taken the trip themselves.
There is a ton of verified data, authenticated samples and the fact that man-made items are in place on the Moon RIGHT NOW that were not there before humans visited.
I've seen some of the actual evidence with my own eyes.

It aint' faith, fellas. It is factual and proven history.

Literally thousands have worked for NASA, the .gov space programs and it's vendors. You want to tell me faking a Moon landing was the greatest secret/lie ever to be performed against mankind? And not one person has broken the silence or revealed the lie?

Actually I have walked on the moon too, so you even have more proof than you thought. NASA is a very small company and everyone knows everyone elses business so you could never keep a secret. On a clear night you can actually see the vehicles still parked up there next to the flag.Now that is proof! Last but not least I've seen the footage on TV so it has to be real and Uncle Sam would not lie to WE the People.VERY INTELLECTUAL

 

[Diogenes]

My goodness. This is still going on?

Reformed pastor states: “ . . . objective, is when the proposition is certainly true of itself;” Why yes it is, which makes it very difficult to follow that with this: “Since many Christians have forgotten that Christianity is objective . . .” Um? Certainly true of itself? By what possible standard? Then the immediate negation and backing away: “I can't persuade any on here that the Bible is true, or, that God exists.” Um? Why not? If something is objective, and is certainly true of itself, then that thing ought to be easily demonstrated – I pick up a rock, I drop it, and it falls: Gravity. Simple, and objective, and therefore easily demonstrated. So why this: “What ever the reason the atheist offers its all subjective.” Wow. Compared to what? The ‘certain’ truth of a set of declarations that do little more than assert themselves to be true? Objectivity requires a bit more thinking than declaring.

Madman states: “When the ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius was asked what he would do to set the world right he answered: “I would insist on the exact definition of words.” Excellent point, I’ll get right back to that one . . .

Gtparts states: “When one finds the Truth, the quest is over. So it is with Christians.” Whew, thank goodness the quest is over . . . but how come Christian doctrine has changed so many times if you had it right to begin with? Not to belabor the parts folks want to gloss over and forget about in the history of this particular religion, but it is easily demonstrated that ‘Christian’ truth, believed without question, has supported some pretty wrong-headed ideas over the years, and has somehow evolved past the burning of witches and the like . . . So, if it was the Truth, and the quest was over, then a few years later it wasn’t the truth, and the quest wasn’t over, then which parts of the doctrines that are still being changed today are you willing to defend? At which particular date did you decide to draw your own personal line? The funny part about ‘truth’ is that is doesn’t keep on changing . . .

Ronnie T states: “It's back to the original question. How intellectual is Atheism?” Ah. Now we are back to that definition question that madman brought up . . .

There is a fairly huge distinction, so far as definitions go, between intelligence and intellect. (And I’d hardly be one to let Confucius down, what with him being so inscrutable and all . . . ) Hofstadter spent quite a lot of time refining the difference, but in the interest of brevity – Intelligence is a practical quality that operates solely within the confines of a set of limited but clearly stated goals. Having once been provided with an idea or a goal, intelligence remembers and is able to implement. Admirable enough, and all too rare . . .

Intellect, on the other hand, (and the question was, How intellectual is Atheism?), is the creative and contemplative side of the mind, that part of us that ponders, imagines, theorizes, examines, criticizes, and wonders. In short, intellect does not simply accept teachings, where intelligence might. The intellectual learns his lessons, the same as the intelligent, but does not leave it at that – the intellectual asks why, and seeks to change those things that make no real sense and which cannot be demonstrated to be true.

Religions, all religions, are handed down as teachings, and intelligent people can learn those teachings and carry them forward, unquestioning. Or, they can utilize their intellect and question those teachings . . . and perhaps stop burning witches and ‘heretics,’ and adapt to demonstrable truth -- real truth. Or not. Perhaps the utterly silly exchange over the Moon landings is an example of the ‘or not’ portion . . . Stubborn adherence to ancient doctrine, when it leads to denying the easily demonstrated, cleaves the ‘intelligent’ from the ‘intellectual,’ and leaves the ‘true believers’ behind . . . So, perhaps in this regard, the question is posed backwards, and it ought to be, “How Intellectual is Religion?”

 

[Ronnie T]

My goodness. This is still going on?

Reformed pastor states: “ . . . objective, is when the proposition is certainly true of itself;” Why yes it is, which makes it very difficult to follow that with this: “Since many Christians have forgotten that Christianity is objective . . .” Um? Certainly true of itself? By what possible standard? Then the immediate negation and backing away: “I can't persuade any on here that the Bible is true, or, that God exists.” Um? Why not? If something is objective, and is certainly true of itself, then that thing ought to be easily demonstrated – I pick up a rock, I drop it, and it falls: Gravity. Simple, and objective, and therefore easily demonstrated. So why this: “What ever the reason the atheist offers its all subjective.” Wow. Compared to what? The ‘certain’ truth of a set of declarations that do little more than assert themselves to be true? Objectivity requires a bit more thinking than declaring.

Madman states: “When the ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius was asked what he would do to set the world right he answered: “I would insist on the exact definition of words.” Excellent point, I’ll get right back to that one . . .

Gtparts states: “When one finds the Truth, the quest is over. So it is with Christians.” Whew, thank goodness the quest is over . . . but how come Christian doctrine has changed so many times if you had it right to begin with? Not to belabor the parts folks want to gloss over and forget about in the history of this particular religion, but it is easily demonstrated that ‘Christian’ truth, believed without question, has supported some pretty wrong-headed ideas over the years, and has somehow evolved past the burning of witches and the like . . . So, if it was the Truth, and the quest was over, then a few years later it wasn’t the truth, and the quest wasn’t over, then which parts of the doctrines that are still being changed today are you willing to defend? At which particular date did you decide to draw your own personal line? The funny part about ‘truth’ is that is doesn’t keep on changing . . .

Ronnie T states: “It's back to the original question. How intellectual is Atheism?” Ah. Now we are back to that definition question that madman brought up . . .

There is a fairly huge distinction, so far as definitions go, between intelligence and intellect. (And I’d hardly be one to let Confucius down, what with him being so inscrutable and all . . . ) Hofstadter spent quite a lot of time refining the difference, but in the interest of brevity – Intelligence is a practical quality that operates solely within the confines of a set of limited but clearly stated goals. Having once been provided with an idea or a goal, intelligence remembers and is able to implement. Admirable enough, and all too rare . . .

Intellect, on the other hand, (and the question was, How intellectual is Atheism?), is the creative and contemplative side of the mind, that part of us that ponders, imagines, theorizes, examines, criticizes, and wonders. In short, intellect does not simply accept teachings, where intelligence might. The intellectual learns his lessons, the same as the intelligent, but does not leave it at that – the intellectual asks why, and seeks to change those things that make no real sense and which cannot be demonstrated to be true.

Religions, all religions, are handed down as teachings, and intelligent people can learn those teachings and carry them forward, unquestioning. Or, they can utilize their intellect and question those teachings . . . and perhaps stop burning witches and ‘heretics,’ and adapt to demonstrable truth -- real truth. Or not. Perhaps the utterly silly exchange over the Moon landings is an example of the ‘or not’ portion . . . Stubborn adherence to ancient doctrine, when it leads to denying the easily demonstrated, cleaves the ‘intelligent’ from the ‘intellectual,’ and leaves the ‘true believers’ behind . . . So, perhaps in this regard, the question is posed backwards, and it ought to be, “How Intellectual is Religion?”

Diogenes.......... You've said a lot in your last post. You republished several people's words; you've restated the original question again ( as I did also).
But, lets face the fact. Fact. If you remain an atheist all of your nature life, you'll never know for sure if our God exist or not. You will always have that little question in the back of your brain.
And I might some day find out that the entire space program was/is a lie.
Wouldn't that be something?

 

[Diogenes]

I suppose that it would be something, but I'll think that the odds, on both sides, are pretty much against you ever finding a truth in either proposition. The nagging doubt in the back of the brain is not mine, that is to say . . .

 

[ambush80]

Some interesting thoughts from The Church of Free Thought:

http://www.churchoffreethought.org/frequently-asked-questions#beliefs

How can you think freely if you are not free to believe in god(s)?

Freethought is not thinking whatever one likes. Thinking is much like many other things we do in that it is subject to certain rules and restrictions that we call reason or logic. Freethought consists of applying the tools of reason to problems that are generally considered "religious."

For thousands of years, those who have thought hardest about the question of god(s), carefully setting aside faith and other personal considerations, have been forced to the conclusion that the existence of god(s) remains speculative at best. At the same time, the efforts of believers to construct arguments to prove the existence of god(s) have all met with failure.

Therefore, until and unless new and relevant facts or reasons are introduced, Freethinkers remain unpersuaded of, and, in fact, are justified in strongly doubting any claims of the supernatural.

Don't you know it is impossible to declare with certainty that there are no gods?

Some atheists say that they are certain that no god(s) exist. When they do, they typically mean that a particular sort of god cannot exist because of some logical impossibility. For example, even ancient thinkers rejected the idea of a god who was both all-powerful and all-knowing, because these two attributes are mutually exclusive. The same difficulties apply in the case of a god claimed to be all-good and all-powerful.

Other atheists say that the notion of god(s) is incomprehensible, or too vague to be meaningful. They point out that the problem is not that one cannot prove a negative. After all, it can easily be disproved that the National Zoo has a unicorn exhibit. But one cannot disprove a claim that god(s) exist in the absence of any means of testing for such existence.

Each of these positions and others besides them come with their own set of arguments and objections. All are useful and instructive in understanding what it means to believe or know something. But atheism doesn’t stand or fall on any particular interpretation of these subtleties. Finally, to the extent that certainty about the nonexistence of god(s) is not possible, certainty about their existence is equally impossible.

Can a Freethinker believe in God?

It is exceedingly doubtful that a Freethinker today could believe in god(s). There are three reasons for this:

There is essentially a complete lack of evidence for the existence of god(s), and all evidence once thought to be supportive of the existence of god(s) is better explained by other means.

There are many facts and reasons that weigh against the existence of most kinds of god(s).

There is strong evidence that god(s) were devised by human beings to meet human needs.

Essentially the only reasons left for believing in god(s) today are those of tradition, authority, and established belief, all of which Freethinkers reject as a means to discerning truth. Therefore, if a Freethinker did believe in god(s) it would be likely that he or she simply had not yet gotten around to examining the question. In this case, though, the belief would be held provisionally and not dogmatically.



Sounds pretty thoughtful to me.

 

[Ronnie T]

Some interesting thoughts from The Church of Free Thought:

http://www.churchoffreethought.org/frequently-asked-questions#beliefs

How can you think freely if you are not free to believe in god(s)?

Freethought is not thinking whatever one likes. Thinking is much like many other things we do in that it is subject to certain rules and restrictions that we call reason or logic. Freethought consists of applying the tools of reason to problems that are generally considered "religious."

For thousands of years, those who have thought hardest about the question of god(s), carefully setting aside faith and other personal considerations, have been forced to the conclusion that the existence of god(s) remains speculative at best. At the same time, the efforts of believers to construct arguments to prove the existence of god(s) have all met with failure.

Therefore, until and unless new and relevant facts or reasons are introduced, Freethinkers remain unpersuaded of, and, in fact, are justified in strongly doubting any claims of the supernatural.

Don't you know it is impossible to declare with certainty that there are no gods?

Some atheists say that they are certain that no god(s) exist. When they do, they typically mean that a particular sort of god cannot exist because of some logical impossibility. For example, even ancient thinkers rejected the idea of a god who was both all-powerful and all-knowing, because these two attributes are mutually exclusive. The same difficulties apply in the case of a god claimed to be all-good and all-powerful.

Other atheists say that the notion of god(s) is incomprehensible, or too vague to be meaningful. They point out that the problem is not that one cannot prove a negative. After all, it can easily be disproved that the National Zoo has a unicorn exhibit. But one cannot disprove a claim that god(s) exist in the absence of any means of testing for such existence.

Each of these positions and others besides them come with their own set of arguments and objections. All are useful and instructive in understanding what it means to believe or know something. But atheism doesn’t stand or fall on any particular interpretation of these subtleties. Finally, to the extent that certainty about the nonexistence of god(s) is not possible, certainty about their existence is equally impossible.

Can a Freethinker believe in God?

It is exceedingly doubtful that a Freethinker today could believe in god(s). There are three reasons for this:

There is essentially a complete lack of evidence for the existence of god(s), and all evidence once thought to be supportive of the existence of god(s) is better explained by other means.

There are many facts and reasons that weigh against the existence of most kinds of god(s).

There is strong evidence that god(s) were devised by human beings to meet human needs.

Essentially the only reasons left for believing in god(s) today are those of tradition, authority, and established belief, all of which Freethinkers reject as a means to discerning truth. Therefore, if a Freethinker did believe in god(s) it would be likely that he or she simply had not yet gotten around to examining the question. In this case, though, the belief would be held provisionally and not dogmatically.



Sounds pretty thoughtful to me.

Just the opposite seems likely to me. The free thinker can more honestly look at the world and realize that all of this could not have happened without a Super-Divine God being involved in it.
Case in point. Last night on Nat Geo channel I caught a bit about a particular bird that had a very unusual ability. The narrator said something like this.

"This bird had such a keep desire to move his life beyond its limited that it would ways to evolve so that it could become what it knew it could become. It changed it natural limitations because of it's desire to do more."

I consider myself a free thinker but I believe the above statement could only be believed by an idiot.
The bird willed itself to evolve!! Get out of here.

 

[ambush80]

Just the opposite seems likely to me. The free thinker can more honestly look at the world and realize that all of this could not have happened without a Super-Divine God being involved in it.

Evidence? Or do you just know it in your bones?

Case in point. Last night on Nat Geo channel I caught a bit about a particular bird that had a very unusual ability. The narrator said something like this.

"This bird had such a keep desire to move his life beyond its limited that it would ways to evolve so that it could become what it knew it could become. It changed it natural limitations because of it's desire to do more."

I consider myself a free thinker but I believe the above statement could only be believed by an idiot.
The bird willed itself to evolve!! Get out of here.

Please fix your quote so that it makes sense.

 

[Ronnie T]

See if it makes better sense now. Sometimes my fingers don't hit the button my brain wants them to press.
"Case in point. Last night on Nat Geo channel I caught a bit about a particular bird that had a very unusual ability. The narrator said something like this.

"This bird had such a keen desire to move his life beyond its limitations that it would find ways to evolve so that it could become what it knew it could become. It changed it natural limitations because of it's desire to do more."

I consider myself a free thinker but I believe the above statement could only be believed by an idiot.
The bird willed itself to evolve!! Get out of here.
End Quote.

You're right, I did make a mess of that.

 

[ambush80]

See if it makes better sense now. Sometimes my fingers don't hit the button my brain wants them to press.
"Case in point. Last night on Nat Geo channel I caught a bit about a particular bird that had a very unusual ability. The narrator said something like this.

"This bird had such a keen desire to move his life beyond its limitations that it would find ways to evolve so that it could become what it knew it could become. It changed it natural limitations because of it's desire to do more."

I consider myself a free thinker but I believe the above statement could only be believed by an idiot.
The bird willed itself to evolve!! Get out of here.
End Quote.

You're right, I did make a mess of that.

Whatever that narrator said is nonsense. He doesn't understand evolution. He doesn't have a good grasp of how evolution works. I suspect he may have been speaking metaphorically, perhaps about the development of the whole species. I don't know. I'd have to see the show.

 

[Diogenes]

To ambush80’s thoughts -- well said.

Ronnie T responded: “The free thinker can more honestly look at the world and realize that all of this could not have happened without a Super-Divine God being involved in it.” It is hard to know what you mean by, “. . . all of this. . . ” Would that include, say, random meteor and asteroid strikes (proven); volcanic catastrophes (proven); Tsunamis and glacial torrential flooding resulting from volcanic activity (proven); advancing and retreating glaciers (proven); massive extinctions of creatures on a global scale (proven); tornadoes (proven); hurricanes (proven); magnetic pole shifts (proven); changes in the angle of the planet’s axis of rotation (proven); new land masses forming from volcanic activity in a matter of days (proven); and on a smaller scale, bacterial and viral plagues that wipe out millions (proven); cancers (proven); predatory and poisonous animals and insects (proven); undrinkable water (proven); droughts that wipe out thousands (proven); and the whole host of natural phenomena that I could easily take ten pages to list without exhausting the catalog?

Super-Divine. Honestly. You’ve certainly won converts with that argument . . . But really, right now there are more people living on this planet than have lived cumulatively in all of history, and there is only one reason for that – We have learned how to overcome, predict, and mostly protect ourselves from all of those ‘Super-Divine’ things that nature uses to try to kill us, and has used to kill us ever since we arrived. So if “ . . . all of this . . .” is the result of a Divine Being, then simple observation might cause one to arrive at the conclusion that we’re doing a pretty good job of thwarting that Being’s will . . .

 

[Ronnie T]

To ambush80’s thoughts -- well said.

Ronnie T responded: “The free thinker can more honestly look at the world and realize that all of this could not have happened without a Super-Divine God being involved in it.” It is hard to know what you mean by, “. . . all of this. . . ” Would that include, say, random meteor and asteroid strikes (proven); volcanic catastrophes (proven); Tsunamis and glacial torrential flooding resulting from volcanic activity (proven); advancing and retreating glaciers (proven); massive extinctions of creatures on a global scale (proven); tornadoes (proven); hurricanes (proven); magnetic pole shifts (proven); changes in the angle of the planet’s axis of rotation (proven); new land masses forming from volcanic activity in a matter of days (proven); and on a smaller scale, bacterial and viral plagues that wipe out millions (proven); cancers (proven); predatory and poisonous animals and insects (proven); undrinkable water (proven); droughts that wipe out thousands (proven); and the whole host of natural phenomena that I could easily take ten pages to list without exhausting the catalog?

Super-Divine. Honestly. You’ve certainly won converts with that argument . . . But really, right now there are more people living on this planet than have lived cumulatively in all of history, and there is only one reason for that – We have learned how to overcome, predict, and mostly protect ourselves from all of those ‘Super-Divine’ things that nature uses to try to kill us, and has used to kill us ever since we arrived. So if “ . . . all of this . . .” is the result of a Divine Being, then simple observation might cause one to arrive at the conclusion that we’re doing a pretty good job of thwarting that Being’s will . . .

Your comments and beliefs as shown above are the very reasons I don't think atheists are very intellectual.
I'm not able to say for sure but I suspect God is the originator of the things that I highlighted in blue above. The other things, we humans probably are responsible for them.

1Corinthians 1:19 For it is written,
"I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE, AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE."
20Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.
22For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; 23but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, 24but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble;
27but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, 28and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, 29so that no man may boast before God.
30But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, 31so that, just as it is written, "LET HIM WHO BOASTS, BOAST IN THE LORD."

 

[ambush80]

To ambush80’s thoughts -- well said.

Ronnie T responded: “The free thinker can more honestly look at the world and realize that all of this could not have happened without a Super-Divine God being involved in it.” It is hard to know what you mean by, “. . . all of this. . . ” Would that include, say, random meteor and asteroid strikes (proven); volcanic catastrophes (proven); Tsunamis and glacial torrential flooding resulting from volcanic activity (proven); advancing and retreating glaciers (proven); massive extinctions of creatures on a global scale (proven); tornadoes (proven); hurricanes (proven); magnetic pole shifts (proven); changes in the angle of the planet’s axis of rotation (proven); new land masses forming from volcanic activity in a matter of days (proven); and on a smaller scale, bacterial and viral plagues that wipe out millions (proven); cancers (proven); predatory and poisonous animals and insects (proven); undrinkable water (proven); droughts that wipe out thousands (proven); and the whole host of natural phenomena that I could easily take ten pages to list without exhausting the catalog?

Super-Divine. Honestly. You’ve certainly won converts with that argument . . . But really, right now there are more people living on this planet than have lived cumulatively in all of history, and there is only one reason for that – We have learned how to overcome, predict, and mostly protect ourselves from all of those ‘Super-Divine’ things that nature uses to try to kill us, and has used to kill us ever since we arrived. So if “ . . . all of this . . .” is the result of a Divine Being, then simple observation might cause one to arrive at the conclusion that we’re doing a pretty good job of thwarting that Being’s will . . .

"The free thinker can more honestly look at the world and realize that all of this could not have happened without a Super-Divine God being involved in it."



I imagine he's talking more about: The first smile from your child or the cloud of steam from an elks mouth on a frosty morning or the jewel like spots on a fresh caught trout or amazement at the stars on a clear night. Indeed, all these things induce a visceral response that may move one in a way that is simultaneously powerful and enigmatic; so much so that we may attribute some unearthly cause to them.

I've felt those things. I've been moved by great art or great beauty and by the smile of my first born and the intensity of my response leaves me clueless. But I realize that just because I don't fully understand it doesn't make it magic. In a sense, it's like lightning to the caveman, but unlike the caveman I'm going to try to understand its nature. If it turns out to be magic then I'll except that, but as you pointed out, the odds are that we will eventually be able to describe the source of these mysteries.

I sometimes think that persons of faith don't want to investigate the nature of the "great mysteries" for fear that they will somehow be diminished. A psychologist or a behaviorist or an anthropologist can explain how my love for my child works but it will never diminish how I feel. I believe that I am better off for knowing how it works, though.

 

[ambush80]

Your comments and beliefs as shown above are the very reasons I don't think atheists are very intellectual.
I'm not able to say for sure but I suspect God is the originator of the things that I highlighted in blue above. The other things, we humans probably are responsible for them.

That's the whole point right there! Keep that uncertainty fire burning and burning HOT! That's where knowledge comes from. That's why people look through microscopes and fly to the Moon. That's why we have fuel burning dragsters and the Amish drive horses and buggies. They decided to stop advancing with the rest of civilization somewhere along the line (most likely not an intellectual descision)They decided they were good right where they were at. I'm not saying that we're better than the Amish, but they benefit from technology too.

I can't imagine how we will ever find out who the "originator" is or if there even is one. So, I implore you, believe or don't believe, just don't allow your position to limit your quest for knowledge, either way. I assure you that Atheists are delving into the mysteries of spirituality and in the same way people of faith should delve into science. That's intellectual.

 

[redwards]

....
I can't imagine how we will ever find out who the "originator" is or if there even is one. So, I implore you, believe or don't believe, just don't allow your position to limit your quest for knowledge, either way. I assure you that Atheists are delving into the mysteries of spirituality and in the same way people of faith should delve into science. That's intellectual.

I can. When an undertaker gets the call to come pick up the body of an individual who has passed on....believe me.... that individual who has passed on knows whether there is an "originator" or not.
And unless you know something the rest of us don't, you, as we all, will face that day...someday.

 

[WTM45]

I can. When an undertaker gets the call to come pick up the body of an individual who has passed on....believe me.... that individual who has passed on knows whether there is an "originator" or not.
And unless you know something the rest of us don't, you, as we all, will face that day...someday.

There is no proof or evidence available to confirm that stance as being factually based.

 

[combsatl]

How much knowledge does a person need to become an atheist?

It simply takes the harsh realization that religion, in general, is not an answer. While it may not necessarily take 'knowledge' to become atheist, it takes one to open their eyes and see the big picture - a picture painted by contrasting religions, competing gods and deities, and the overall hypocrisy that causes smart and decent people to do dumb and indecent things.

Some atheists decide to learn all they can about the religions of the world to try to find something that makes sense to them or conflicting information between the religions to further build a case disproving the existence of any god.

The main thing, with me, is this: the word of the bible is good; do not kill, do not steal, treat others like you want to be treated, etc. I would have no problem with any religion if that's where it all stopped... but it doesn't. Far too many people take the bible literally and believe every... single... story. I find it amazing that so many smart people get so wrapped up in this idea that a story, written by many different people, over 2000 years ago (and many of them older than that - borrowed or stolen from previous beliefs and stories) actually happened and that an invisible, infallible, intangible being is watching your every move and the wrong one could land you in an eternity of ****ation and hellfire.

If mankind would look in themselves (as well as family/friends), rather than an intangible being, for guidance, help, strength the world would be a much better place.

the one who rose from the dead.

Can you PROVE he rose from the dead? Were you there to see it happen? Did you have any friends who saw it, or maybe your brother's, friend's, mom's, cousin's, best friend's brother's, sister's, seeing eye dog?

 

[ambush80]

I can. When an undertaker gets the call to come pick up the body of an individual who has passed on....believe me.... that individual who has passed on knows whether there is an "originator" or not.
And unless you know something the rest of us don't, you, as we all, will face that day...someday.

The deceased may stop "knowing" anything from that moment forward.

I do know that no one has come back from the dead (except in mythology) and brought back proof of an originator. Yes. As far as I know, everyone will die, beyond that, it's all speculation.

I find it amazing that so many smart people get so wrapped up in this idea that a story, written by many different people, over 2000 years ago (and many of them older than that - borrowed or stolen from previous beliefs and stories) actually happened and that an invisible, infallible, intangible being is watching your every move and the wrong one could land you in an eternity of ****ation and hellfire.

See the post about predestination.