Like Tree54Likes

Are you a theist or an atheist? Is it wrong to be the latter?

Closed Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Tuen Mun
    Posts
    2,074

    Probably as well that I managed to miss this thread when it first started up, or I would easily have wasted a lot of the last 2 days! I can identify well with Hullexile's route of fundamentalist atheist (my parents sent me to Humanist Society Sunday school back in the 1960s), after which I sort of migrated through philosophical and later more "spiritual practices" new-ageism to theism of the definitely christian stripe.

    I freely confess that I do not understand all the God stuff. If I did, I would have a mind/intelligence/ consciousness greater than God's, which is daft. Same kind of thing as expecting the fleas on the local feral cats to understand me and what I do in my office, only more so.

    I do know that man's increasing understanding of biology is making classical Darwinian evolution theory increasingly untenable as we learn more about even simple cell structure, let alone about viruses, RNA and DNA ... not only do the probabilities involved for the necessary historical mutations generate numbers which make inches in a light year look comprehensible, but we have also learned that natural selection involves reducing the amount of genetic material, not increasing it. I'm aware that there are various other theories out there, but a divine first cause is thus far - to me at least - the least unlikely scenario for the world in which we find ourselves. People like John Lennox and Ravi Zacharias explain this stuff much better than I.
    So if I had a car I would want a bumper sticker saying, "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist."

    As far as my fellow humans are concerned, I don't mind what beliefs you hold as long as you have genuinely worked through the options for yourself, and don't merely parrot what you hear around you, whether it's from the Dalai Lama, Ian Paisley, Stephen Fry, or ... ...

    hannah01 and juanalias like this.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,492

    In my opinion, neither science nor religion are able provide satisfactory answers at this time.

    hannah01 and chingleutsch like this.

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,492

    Typical twisting of comment in order to try to ridicule a poster...Never was it said that those finding evolution more credible were parroting Stephen Fry.

    Whenever the word theory is mentioned, it has to involve a certain amount of faith until they are proven.

    This poster is the perfect example of the atheist suffering from a sentiment of superiority towards others and is incapable of respectful dialogue when it comes to this subject


  4. #54

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    149

    I wish I understood what you lot are on about.I was just advocating tolerance


  5. #55

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ex Sai Kunger Sunny Qld for now
    Posts
    8,318

    Personally we're an Athiest family, I've been quite satisfied living my life within the natural world and the logical science that tries best to explain it. This does not mean however, that I'm closed minded about it, more a healthy curiosity to explore the boundaries, if anything.

    I feel that as modern society has become better educated, we are more willing to ask pertinent questions, more demanding of empirical evidence to support various arguments about religion. So I dont concern myself with matters of blind faith. I'll keep an open mind and prefer sound logic than a mysterious explanation, or ancient story.

    I understand early on in human recorded history, religion was used as an instrument of control of the peasant masses more than anything else, it once stopped the god fearing poor and uneducated of society, from killing the rich.( we now have judicial laws for that) That's my point of view but it seems logical enough to me. I don't see it particularly relevant ( religion in general ) in the 21st century, when we're better educated than at any other time, a scientific/technological world, a world that we owe most of our human achievements, technologically/medically, to science. Manned space flight and aerospace for example, are the byproducts of repeatable scientific process, ( logical ) not based on blind faith or praying to a god, or throwing chicken bones in the air.

    Probably what I am trying to say is, I'm not at all superstitious in any way, shape, or form. I place my trust in sound, or proven scientific (known) laws and keep an open mind to the continual pursuit and gathering of evidence to better understand theory. Our human ability to question and constantly learn is what makes life interesting, to not just accept an ancient story, but to seek answers, I think that is healthy.

    I don't mind what people think, or feel, in the sanctity of their own home, that's totally allowed in a civillised society, but I'm not comfortable with religion having any influence of governance and prefer a distinct separation between church and state.

    That's my 20 cents worth.

    hannah01 and HK_Katherine like this.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    29,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Skyhook:
    Personally we're an Athiest family, I've been quite satisfied living my life within the natural world and the logical science that tries best to explain it. This does not mean however, that I'm closed minded about it, more a healthy curiosity to explore the boundaries, if anything.

    I feel that as modern society has become better educated, we are more willing to ask pertinent questions, more demanding of empirical evidence to support various arguments about religion. So I dont concern myself with matters of blind faith. I'll keep an open mind and prefer sound logic than a mysterious explanation, or ancient story.

    I understand early on in human recorded history, religion was used as an instrument of control of the peasant masses more than anything else, it once stopped the god fearing poor and uneducated of society, from killing the rich.( we now have judicial laws for that) That's my point of view but it seems logical enough to me. I don't see it particularly relevant ( religion in general ) in the 21st century, when we're better educated than at any other time, a scientific/technological world, a world that we owe most of our human achievements, technologically/medically, to science. Manned space flight and aerospace for example, are the byproducts of repeatable scientific process, ( logical ) not based on blind faith or praying to a god, or throwing chicken bones in the air.

    Probably what I am trying to say is, I'm not at all superstitious in any way, shape, or form. I place my trust in sound, or proven scientific (known) laws and keep an open mind to the continual pursuit and gathering of evidence to better understand theory. Our human ability to question and constantly learn is what makes life interesting, to not just accept an ancient story, but to seek answers, I think that is healthy.

    I don't mind what people think, or feel, in the sanctity of their own home, that's totally allowed in a civillised society, but I'm not comfortable with religion having any influence of governance and prefer a distinct separation between church and state.

    That's my 20 cents worth.
    And a totally acceptable and logical approach. I would question "in their own home" as that would rule out churches etc. I guess you didn't mean it literally though.

    The separation of church and state is something I strongly agree with and something we suffer badly from in the Philippines despite that separation being enshrined in the Constitution.

Closed Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6