My qualms with atheism.

[ADaisyChain]

Here is what I've been thinking:

We only know what we have observed. For example, we wouldn't know 2+2=4 unless at one point someone took two seperate piles of apples, 2 in each pile, and shoved them together to see there was now a pile of 4 apples.

This is what originally turned me off to religion. It is unobserved and can easily be created by a good mind. Also, the fact that religion comforts so many people made it feel somewhat empty to me. Most people will believe anything that comforts them. And since the creation of the ego (the individual) we have thought ourselves seperate from the whole, and with that thought we created the soul, as becoming one with the whole (as observed in death, aka the end of our individuality outside the minds of others) makes us very uncomfortable as self proclaimed 'individuals'.

Here's my problem though. Everything I've observed also shows me that in order for something to exist, energy must be spent in its creation. Be it a house, or a novel. Thought, and physical energy are always used. This applies to everything I have ever seen.

But, in order for there to have been a beginning (as everything I've seen has had) energy must have been used for it's creation. But, if nothing was before it, what cerated the initial energy? And if its "god", then what initial energy created god?

It seems to me that either the universe is infinite and has always been (which in itself is very god like, to have no beginning or end) or something that has always been has created it. I think the second is less likely, but that could be because I have not observed something outside of the universe. I also have never observed something with no beginning or end. One or the other exists though, whether I have observed it or not. And I think it just as likely that the universe was the initial infinity (does this make the universe god, having no beginning or end?) rather than god, because I have seen the universe, and I have not seen god.

To be an atheist is to claim to know the unobserved just as much as believing in a being outside of the laws of the universe. The atheist is just a touch more logical, but barely. They both put an answer on the unanswerable. So I'm trying to figure out why I keep bothering giving myself titles like 'atheist' or 'agnostic' or 'christian' and don't just call myself 'existant and accept it'.

Even if something did not make us, we exist. We know this because we can observe our own existance, just as we can observe yeast rising. Something existing without creation in itself is miraculous and defies all the observations we can make here. That means (to me) that there is just as likely to be an entity outside of this universe, and an entity outside of the entity outside of this universe. If infinity is the one truth (numbers can go infinitely lower or higher.) that seems like the higher power microscope we use the more new things we will see for infinity, and if we could look outside (we can't anymore then a person in a room can see the whole house) it too would continue for infinity.

I see the benefits of atheism as this: they accept only the now and what they see. This is in my opinion the wisest thing we can do since we may never know what is beyond this, but atheists seem to think they know what is beyond this and I'm beginning to fail to see how thats any different then a religious person thinking they know whats going on.

I accept death for what it is, the destruction of my conciousness, but even in death, our atoms stay alive and may serve new purposes. This is not immortality of the self, since the self will die, but the parts that made up the self will not, which points to a circular existance.

If there's no beginning there can never be an end. ((thanks alice in wonderland)) So if there's no end, there's no end to the possibilities.

Someone show me how my thought pattern is unsound, I'm making myself uncomfortable.

"You, are becoming Gods. There's a new master of creation, and it's you! You've unravelled DNA and at the same time you're cultivating bacteria strong enough to kill every living thing. D'you think you are ready for that much power? You lot? Cheeky bastards. You're running around science like kids with guns, creating a new world, while the one you've got is stinking. Go on, hands up, hands up anyone who thinks you've got it right. Yeah, there's always one. I can see you. If you want the position of god then take the responsibility."

ADaisyChain Reviewed by ADaisyChain on 12-14-2005. My qualms with atheism. Here is what I've been thinking: We only know what we have observed. For example, we wouldn't know 2+2=4 unless at one point someone took two seperate piles of apples, 2 in each pile, and shoved them together to see there was now a pile of 4 apples. This is what originally turned me off to religion. It is unobserved and can easily be created by a good mind. Also, the fact that religion comforts so many people made it feel somewhat empty to me. Most people will believe anything that Rating: 5

[RastaKaze]

i dont know man.. you can drive youself insane pondering on all those factors... but as humans, most of us do anyway. perhaps its the feeling of mystisicm and uncertainty that drives us to want to know things. all i know is that im here, right now, and that's all im worrying about. live life the fullest while you can cause it does end.. well mabye not I heard something in 1998 about scientists succesfully engineering 'immortal' human cells. so yeah one day we will definitely be able to live forever, perhaps even uncover the mystery of our world..

[Breukelen advocaat]

You (ADAISYCHAIN) are making a statement that is very biased. Please tell us where we can find evidence that of a known atheist who makes the claim of being able to "know the unobserved". I may be wrong, but I don't think that any Atheists have said anything remotely like that.

Atheism takes years to fully grasp. I would suggest reading books and articles by the following masters of Atheism; by familiarizing yourself with their works you can better understand what it is all about:

Robert Ingersoll (an agnostic) http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...ert_ingersoll/

Madalyn Murray O'Hair http://www.atheists.org/visitors.center/OHairFamily/

the American Atheist website http://www.atheists.org/,

Chapman Cohen, http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...en/index.shtml

Bertrand Russell (mathematician) http://www.users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

Frederich Nietzche http://www.primitivism.com/antichrist.htm

Joseph McCabe (GREAT stuff by an ex-Jesuit priest that formerly worked in the Vatican Library and had access to â??forbiddenâ?� Catholic documents. http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...joseph_mccabe/
http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...ig_blue_books/
I have an original copy, printed in the 1930's or 40's, of this book: The Holy Faith Of Romanists, How Catholics Are Hypnotized About Their Weird Creed by Joseph McCabe (1867 - 1955).
McCabe was WAY ahead of his time - as were many others listed here.

http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...s/book_16.html

We used to have to BUY all of the above â?? now much of it is totally free. I wish that I had been able to get these titles years ago without having to send money through the mail and wait for the mailman. It's nice to have a "hard copy", but many of these works are either out-of-print, or very hard to find.

Happy reading.

[CocaCola]

Hahaha... Quit your crying Jesus!

[Harvesthetic]

thx so much for the interesting read, guys.

sheep follow, skeptics question!
Breukelen advocaat, what is the origin of you nickname? Do you speak dutch?

[Breukelen advocaat]

thx so much for the interesting read, guys.sheep follow, skeptics question!
Breukelen advocaat, what is the origin of you nickname? Do you speak dutch?

No, only words in English that are derived (stoop, etc.) from them, and an occasional slip into Brooklynese - which is a combination of old English, German, and Dutch accents.

I have some Dutch ancestry (from centuries ago), and I was born and raised in Brooklyn - formerly known as the "City of Churches", when Brooklyn was not considered part of New York City. Needless to say, other that listening to an occasional presentation of music in them, I do not visit churches.

Many of Brooklyn's streets still have Dutch names, and there are even a number of Dutch-built churches and buildings there.

I still live in da boro of Brooklyn. Anybody got a problem wit dat?

[Stedric]

We know that something can't come from nothing, but in order for the universe to exist something had to come from nothing at some point. Chicken and egg, as I've said, you'll never be able to fully wrap your heads around it.

Probably why I'm an Agnostic.

[ADaisyChain]

Please tell us where we can find evidence that of a known atheist who makes the claim of being able to "know the unobserved". I may be wrong, but I don't think that any Atheists have said anything remotely like that.

Atheism:
# the doctrine or belief that there is no God
# a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods

We have observed that in order for something to exist, it must be created.

Claiming otherwise goes against all of our observations.

[ADaisyChain]

Yeah, stedric just said it.

[Breukelen advocaat]

Atheism:
# the doctrine or belief that there is no God
# a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods
We have observed that in order for something to exist, it must be created.
Claiming otherwise goes against all of our observations.

WHO said that? I'd like to know if an Atheist said it. I do not accept definitions of Atheism from theists (such as Webster). You cannot cram centuries of Atheism into a couple of sentences - it's stupid to even try to.