Good work, keep researching ;) it is so nice to watch a mind become more independent xxx
I think Im an Atheist :(? :)?
by chrisuk 78 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Comatose
I know how you feel Chris. I've been there and in some ways still go there from time to time. The grieving does stop though for the most part. And life means more to me now. Life is so much more precious than it was. Living and mattering to others is now so important.
I have also thought about all your questions you raise. I've had the same revelations. You are well on your way to healing. Hang in there.
-
adamah
Seraphim said-
However I would say that belief in God is more than conjecture or guess work, as the idea does explain certain things that science cannot, such as why mathematics is embodied in the physical world we see or how infinity can make the finite.
You keep saying that, but it shows you clearly don't understand the history of mathematics AND the history of scientific inquiries into the Natural world, or the explanatory value of science. Postulating and hypothesizing over the existence of Gods has ZERO explanatory value, since it's actually a NON-ANSWER, a thought-stopper that prevents further inquiry. That's the entire reason that rational scientists roll their eyes at such suggestions from theists: NOT because they're anti-religion, per se, but because a God hypothesis answers NOTHING, since it doesn't explain HOW God(s) manipulated the physical laws to create matter.
As far as your other incorrect assertion that nature follows the laws of math, you're confusing cause and effect, putting the cart BEFORE the horse.
Anyone who's taken calculus knows that many biological and physical processes (eg rate of bacterial growth, rates of chemical reactions, etc) follow exponential and logarithmic functions, but why is that so? It's because such life events seen in nature occur in a predictable and periodic manner under IDEAL conditions (which often don't exist), where eg in looking at the growth rate of bacteria over time, one splits into two, then into four, then sixteen, etc. Of course, bacteria die so the population drops, but attempting to account for all such factors means the equations become more complex to properly describe and predict the behavior of the population. That's why statistics developed.
Point being, the maths developed to EXPLAIN the observations, NOT the other way around. Real life is messy, and it doesn't correlate with simple math (i.e. you need to use calculus-based stats, and not just simple arithmetic).
As far as your "infinity can make finite" claim, I have no idea what you're referring to, but it smacks moreso of something that's driven from your own failure to learn what IS known about the World so you're trying to fill in the gaps of YOUR ignorance with supernatural magical thinking, rather than just getting an education to learn about what IS known.
There's plenty of "appeals to personal ignorance" in such a position, where someone says, "I don't understand something, and therefore no one else CAN possibly understand it, either, so just agree with me...." Hey, it's not MY fault if you don't want to go to college and learn, but please don't try to drag the rest of us into your mudbath, after some of us went to college to wash off the mud of ignorance from our thinking.
Adam
-
Seraphim23
I think you misunderstand my point adamah. You’re suggesting by the sound of it that mathematics, simple or complex was invented rather than discovered. I don’t share that view for a variety of reasons. One cannot prove scientifically why the universe has order as opposed to complete randomness. Science can only describe the laws and how they relate to others and mathematics follows the same path in being able to describe such things in an even more abstract manor than observation and theory can alone, provided the sums add up at the end of the day and it tallies with observation, which is does in many cases.
The question is why does order and rationality exist at all. This science and mathematics won’t tell you if cause and effect are deemed fundamental tenants of the whole show. If cause and effect are fundamental to any explanation of why we get order in the universe, it logically implies infinite regression of such cause and effect, unfortunately infinity’s in mathematics mean the breakdown of any description of physical behaviour.
So one is stuck with either an infinite regression, or the impossible `something from nothing`. I’m not of course using the word nothing is the scientific sense which isn’t literally nothing as we all know. In both cases cause and effect as a concept breakdown in terms of any possible description. This is not a case of lazy thinking; it is a case of being faithful to thought in the first place. Given these facts and questions, which you won’t of course, that science and mathematics cannot solve, there is but one other answer that can be inserted that does at least offer an explanation of order. It’s not going to be a mathematical or scientific explanation as these don’t work for the reasons explained but it will be another type of explanation. The word mind as an explanation is not a bad one because it does explain order and the difference between things that can understand thought and things that cannot.
For example you know you are a thinking and conscious being. You don’t need any proof of that whether it is demonstrative or mathematical. If this is true then there is something fundamentally different about a mind as opposed to any physical or mathematical description that can be understood in common sense terms. Cause and effect is common sense but free will or choice and understanding is not. So to state that such a thing as a mind is the explanation to the universes is not that bad of an alternative to those other explanations that have failed. It is quite rational to the extent that rational can be in this area.
You have faith that science can in time find the answer to why there is order. I say that is faith and your welcome to it I might add. So am I though and I would point out that there are two type of the God of the gap arguments. One science and mathematics can answer and the other they cannot by dint of the nature of science and mathematics.
-
nicolaou
. . is pretty upsetting to me. I’ve always drawn comfort from the Bible, and in believing that there is a God and an afterlife. And to come to the realisation that it’s all untrue is horrible, but I can’t just ignore things . .
Hi Chris. Believe it or not, most of us 'arrogant' atheists do understand what you're going through - I certainly do. Reality sucks sometimes, after all what could possibly compare to the fantasy that we were all sold? At least you aren't travelling alone buddy . .
Oh and for the record, if you think you are an atheist you most definately ARE an atheist!
-
adamah
Seraphim said- I think you misunderstand my point adamah. You’re suggesting by the sound of it that mathematics, simple or complex was invented rather than discovered. I don’t share that view for a variety of reasons. One cannot prove scientifically why the universe has order as opposed to complete randomness.
It should be self-evident as to WHY men would need to develop a system of counting "things" (which lead to the concept of arithmetic): it was required to develop a system of commerce and trade.
As far as the chaos vs order, you're confused: there's far-many-more examples of DISORDER (chaos) found in the Universe than order, such that chaos predominates and rules throughout the Universe. The whole argument of "the perfectly-ordered state of the Universe proves the existence of a creator" is absurd for anyone who, eg understands the rudiments of, and need for, chaos theory. It's a claim coming from personal ignorance, refusing to see the evidence whish IS known.
Even Albert Einstein (who objected to the role of uncertainty into the field of physics, as introduced by the work of Heisenburg and Bohr), eventually admitted this:
“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”
Einstein objected to the concept of black holes (even though his work led to their discovery), but eventually they were confirmed to exist. Einstein was wrong, since in the end the Universe doesn't care one whit about what Einstein thinks about how it should exist: it just exists as it does. In fact, Einstein was not a dogmatist, and he'd likely be tickled pink for his hypothesis to be proven wrong, since scientists often ARE wrong, and science moves forward by hypotheses being falsified, not by being "proven".
Seraphim said- You have faith that science can in time find the answer to why there is order. I say that is faith and your welcome to it I might add. So am I though and I would point out that there are two type of the God of the gap arguments. One science and mathematics can answer and the other they cannot by dint of the nature of science and mathematics.
Project your own discomfort with the unknown onto others much? It's what you're doing right now.
Please don't play the 'your faith in science is equivalent to my faith in woo" card: it's a false equivalency. In fact, I'm willing to restrict use of the word "faith" to the religious connotation, and use ANOTHER word (like 'conviction') for trust that is based on tangible past results.
I'm also perfectly content with saying, "we just don't know all answers right now", as long as it's tied to searching to find answers and not resting on laurels. You want to fill the void with faith in God.
I look back at those who lived 100 years ago, and what if THEY said, "Wrap it up, fellas, as there's no more left to learn, so let's put away the test tubes now"? Scientific inquiry should be like rust, in that it never sleeps, NOR should it be allowed to go into hibernation (as many religious fundamentalists would have us re-enter the dark ages).
Adam
-
tec
Peace Chrisuk!
I do not mean to 'crash' an atheist thread. But you said you were heartbroken, and while I imagine there may be more things than just what you wrote in your OP that are causing your doubts... there are things in your OP that are incorrect, so perhaps I can share something else for you to consider.
I’ve been pondering my beliefs for a while now and I’ve come across things that I just can’t accept. I was recently walking with a Christian who stated that the universe couldn’t just come from nothing. He said that the universe was so complex that it needed a designer, he also said something which I’ve heard before. He said that the human eye alone is so complex and perfect that it had to have had a creator/designer. I responded with: Well, if the universe is so complex that it needed a designer/creator and even the human eye needed the same. That neither could just be, then how much more complex than the human eye, and even the universe would God have too be? I mean if there is a God and he created something as complex as the universe, then how can he just come from nothing? If the universe is too complex to just be, then how much more complex would a creator of the universe have to be? And yet it’s perfectly acceptable for him to just come from nowhere? No sorry that’s a double standard.
I have never bought into this complex designer reasoning... as you noted, it does not make sense; and it is a double standard to say that everything had to come from a creator, but the creator could come from nothing.
However.
God did not come from nothing. God always was. There was never a 'time' that God was not. Everything came from God... not magic 'poof'... but from His energy. Life came from God.
We, through science, are discovering the how of all of this... but we are babes in science in comparison to how much we do not yet know. At the end of that trail... if we ever made it to the end of that trail... we would find God; but I do not think we will get to the end of the trail before Christ returns and 'all eyes will see.'
I’ve also recently discovered that the story of Jesus is based on ancient myths that predate Jesus by thousands of years, and, that said stories are in turn based on how the accents viewed the sun. Something I read was that on the 22nd of December each years the sun is at it’s lowest point, and after 3 days it rises slightly north (the sun being raised on the third day) And that apparently the ancients called the sun the sun of God.
Well, I don't know the source of your information, but I'm going to guess that it is based on some if not much conjecture, and perhaps even false information. I say this because the first thing that threatened my faith many years ago... as seems to be doing for yours now... were the 'christ-myth' accounts. That Christ was a copy cat of previous god-men, and then these authors and experts went on to list all the similarities. With some research, howeve, I quickly found that these claims were based on false information and a lack of research.
I was a bit annoyed with myself at the time, that I allowed myself to doubt over something so baseless, something I should have known was false (as most christ-myth stories have each 'god man' being born on december 25th, and we know that christ was not born on such a date... and a little research shows that none of the others were either) So it was the simple thing that I missed, which should have alerted me to the lack of integrity of these researchers.
For you, there might be something just as simple that you have overlooked. Like for instance in regard to how your source states that the ancients called the sun, the sun of God... well: sun and son are probably only homonyms in the English language.
So there would be no connection except IN the english language.
What you read might be a bit more in depth. Again, I cannot say because I do not know your source. But again... you should fully research the claims, and ask yourself if the conclusions being drawn are TRULY the correct conclusions, or are there other explanations that are going ignored in light of the bias of the people presenting them.
All this questions and discovering that the Bible is just based off of ancient mythology is pretty upsetting to me. I’ve always drawn comfort from the Bible, and in believing that there is a God and an afterlife. And to come to the realisation that it’s all untrue is horrible, but I can’t just ignore things simple because they go against what I believe, facts are facts and I’ll continue down this road of real truth. I’m pretty sure that I’m now an Atheist, I almost wish I was still ignorant of the facts but I can’t un-know something.
I totally understand how you cannot ignore things. I did not... it would have been cowardly of me, and while I could have lived with being cowardly for a while... someone I loved WAS believing the false claims, and I had to then see if there was anything to them or not. So I researched, and although I was upset with myself for doubting when I should have known better, at the same time, doing the research and realizing that there was NOTHING to these claims helped to strengthen my faith... and taught me not to be afraid of the claims and/or any knowledge; even claims or knowledge that 'seems' to contradict Christ and God.
Because they never actually do. It is only our misunderstandings that create conflicts. The truth reveals this, always, in the end.
So please forgive my intrusion, but I had to share my experiences with you, out of love for Christ and God, and also for all those He loves and who love Him.
Peace to you, and may you find the truth as you wish.
Your servant in Christ,
tammy
-
Captain Obvious
Congrats!
It's funny, I think it was a conversation with an uber Christian that helped me realize I was an atheist, too. Just being able to poke holes in their arguments and reasons for believing... It's too easy.
-
cofty
I do not mean to 'crash' an atheist thread. - Tammy
Yes you do.
Thanks though. Nobody makes the case against the irrationality of theism better than you.
-
KateWild
Good for you for making your position known to yourself and us all. There are plenty of believers and atheists her. But I would say you are now in the posting majority. We are sorry to loose you, but we won't try to convince you God is real.
Well done for thinking for yourself.
Kate xx