Atheism is a leap of faith

[KanzulHuda786]

If I were to say that there was no such thing as gold in China, then to prove my statement, I would have to search every square inch of that country in order to confidently say there was no gold. I would also have to search every person to make sure that there were no gold fillings and search every aeroplane in Chinese airspace. Such a mammoth task would be near impossible but would be necessary in order to prove my statement.
Now lets look at the amount knowledge that a human being can possess. It is obvious that even the smartest person who has ever lived couldn't possess even 1% of all the knowledge in existance. But lets imagine that there existed an Atheist who possessed 1% of all the knowledge in existance. This is of course a huge exaggeration, but for the sake of this argument lets say that someone did possess this amount of knowledge. If this person was honest, they would have to admit that the other 99% of knowledge that they didn't possess could have the evidence that proves God's existance. So as you can see from this very simple example, it is impossible to absolutely state that there is no God. Now back to the example. If I found gold in the tooth of one Chinese citizen, then I could truthfully say that there is gold in China even if that amount of Gold was very small.
To conclude: If you claim to be an Atheist, then with respect I say to you that you are actually and Agnostic in the true sense, although I can respect that you may have chosen not believe in God without proof and in that sense you have chosen to be an Atheist, but your claim to be an atheist is not a scientific one, rather a belief or religion.
To say that there is no God requires absolute knowledge. Knowledge of not only our 4 known and understood dimensions but all the higher dimensions as well and that would be impossible for a 3 dimensional creature such as yourself. However, If you had absolute knowledge then yes God would exist, because you would be God. On the other hand, to say that there is a God only requires personal experience or an understanding that the design in creation warrants a designer. But ultimately there really can only be 2 types of people, believers and agnostics. Those who have seen first hand or can see evidence that gold exists in China and those who believe that gold doesn't exist in China, but can never really be sure that this is so.
Also, Atheists often say they have no faith. This is simply not the case. It has to be said that having faith in nothing is not the same as having no faith. Faith that believes that everything came from nothing is a belief and trust that this is the case even in the absence of proof. No Atheist in the world can claim to have no faith. Rather a person who doesn't know whether God exists or not is the person who has no faith.

Atheism goes against Nature

Throughout the history of the world, the majority of people have believed in God. There seems to be something built in the human mind that makes us want to believe.
Over the last decade some really startling facts have been found that show that children have an innate belief in God. Dr Justin Barrett, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford Centre for Anthropology and Mind, states “The preponderance of scientific evidence for the past 10 years or so has shown that a lot more seems to be built into the natural development of children’s minds than we once thought, including a predisposition to see the natural world as designed and purposeful and that some kind of intelligent being is behind that purpose…� He adds that “If we threw a handful [of children] on an island and they raised themselves…they would believe in God�.. To put it simply, his answer as to why anyone would believe in God is that, our minds are designed to do so . Disbelief in God is something which is unnatural to the human being. Oxford University development psychologist Dr Olivera Petrovich, who is an expert in the Psychology of Religion states that, belief in God develops naturally and that ‘‘atheism is definitely an acquired position’’ .
So where did this natural belief in a creator come from? We can’t say it is taught by society as this belief is innate, and studies show that it is independent of societal pressures and is cross-cultural

[AdHoc]

My personal tenacity toward a continued spiritual faith is not driven by a fear that some god would be upset if I didn't at least try to believe in it. My continued persistence to have a love affair with spirituality is two-fold.

1. I confess that it's an enticing dream.

So I have "faith" as "hope". (which is what faith truly is, IMHO).

Only because I feel that a one-shot lifetime seems like such a waste of universe.

So my "faith" is based on the pure romantic hope that there might be something more to reality than meets the eye. It's not based on a fear that some potentially angry creator might need to be pacified by having me cower down to his ego. That a vision of spirituality that, to me, is not even as attractive as pure secular atheism.

2. For me, a purely secular universe is just as miraculous and mysterious as a mystical reality.

From my perspective Atheism (Hardcore Secular Atheism) is indeed just as much a leap of faith as a belief in a spiritual existence. (I will agree with the OP on that point)

As far as I'm concerned a non-spiritual reality is just as absurd as a spiritual reality.

They are both equally absurd. Neither one is anymore "logical" or "reasonable" to my way of thinking.

So since they are on precisely equal footing why not lean toward the more inviting one?

Of course, as a I say, a spiritual picture is only inviting if it's truly divine and benevolent. It's not inviting if it turns out to be an angry egotist who will cast non-believers into eternal damnation.

So for me, it really comes down to choices.

I can chose to believe whatever I want, and so I imagine the best possible scenario I can imagine and "hope" (i.e. have Faith) that this dream could somehow (against all odds) potentially be true.

I certainly have nothing to lose.

If the universe turns out to be purely secular I haven't lost a thing.

If the angry jealous-God religions turn out to be true, then I still haven't lost a thing because I could never worship or love such a demon anyway. So he may as well cast me into his stupid hell fire. Nothing lost there, because to serve such a lunatic for eternity would itself be hell anyway. May as well, just go straight to hell in the first place.

What if a loving God exists?

[Darias]

If I were to say that there was no such thing as gold in China, then to prove my statement, I would have to search every square inch of that country in order to confidently say there was no gold. I would also have to search every person to make sure that there were no gold fillings and search every aeroplane in Chinese airspace. Such a mammoth task would be near impossible but would be necessary in order to prove my statement.
Now lets look at the amount knowledge that a human being can possess. It is obvious that even the smartest person who has ever lived couldn't possess even 1% of all the knowledge in existance. But lets imagine that there existed an Atheist who possessed 1% of all the knowledge in existance. This is of course a huge exaggeration, but for the sake of this argument lets say that someone did possess this amount of knowledge. If this person was honest, they would have to admit that the other 99% of knowledge that they didn't possess could have the evidence that proves God's existance. So as you can see from this very simple example, it is impossible to absolutely state that there is no God. Now back to the example. If I found gold in the tooth of one Chinese citizen, then I could truthfully say that there is gold in China even if that amount of Gold was very small.
To conclude: If you claim to be an Atheist, then with respect I say to you that you are actually and Agnostic in the true sense, although I can respect that you may have chosen not believe in God without proof and in that sense you have chosen to be an Atheist, but your claim to be an atheist is not a scientific one, rather a belief or religion.
To say that there is no God requires absolute knowledge. Knowledge of not only our 4 known and understood dimensions but all the higher dimensions as well and that would be impossible for a 3 dimensional creature such as yourself. However, If you had absolute knowledge then yes God would exist, because you would be God. On the other hand, to say that there is a God only requires personal experience or an understanding that the design in creation warrants a designer. But ultimately there really can only be 2 types of people, believers and agnostics. Those who have seen first hand or can see evidence that gold exists in China and those who believe that gold doesn't exist in China, but can never really be sure that this is so.
Also, Atheists often say they have no faith. This is simply not the case. It has to be said that having faith in nothing is not the same as having no faith. Faith that believes that everything came from nothing is a belief and trust that this is the case even in the absence of proof. No Atheist in the world can claim to have no faith. Rather a person who doesn't know whether God exists or not is the person who has no faith.

Atheism goes against Nature

Throughout the history of the world, the majority of people have believed in God. There seems to be something built in the human mind that makes us want to believe.
Over the last decade some really startling facts have been found that show that children have an innate belief in God. Dr Justin Barrett, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford Centre for Anthropology and Mind, states “The preponderance of scientific evidence for the past 10 years or so has shown that a lot more seems to be built into the natural development of children’s minds than we once thought, including a predisposition to see the natural world as designed and purposeful and that some kind of intelligent being is behind that purpose…� He adds that “If we threw a handful [of children] on an island and they raised themselves…they would believe in God�.. To put it simply, his answer as to why anyone would believe in God is that, our minds are designed to do so . Disbelief in God is something which is unnatural to the human being. Oxford University development psychologist Dr Olivera Petrovich, who is an expert in the Psychology of Religion states that, belief in God develops naturally and that ‘‘atheism is definitely an acquired position’’ .
So where did this natural belief in a creator come from? We can’t say it is taught by society as this belief is innate, and studies show that it is independent of societal pressures and is cross-cultural

This chart should help clear some things up:

[Divine Insight]

When the average person uses the word "theory" they mean something totally different than when a scientist uses the word "theory". In a similar way I think you are using the word "faith" alot different that Christians do.

I'm sure you're right.

In fact, most Christians probably don't even truly think very deeply about what it even means to have "faith".

But there are clearly two major schools of thought.

One is that "faith" means precisely as I described it. A hope that God exists. (or more truthfully) A pretense that they know God exists.

Often times when people have difficulty "keeping the faith" this is the kind of faith they are speaking of. They are having difficulty in maintaining a believe that God even exists at all.

But for those who have convinced themselves that they "know" God exists, they no longer need to associate "faith" with this, becasue they have already convinced themselves that they know that to be true. So for them Faith takes on a whole new meaning,....

Now Faith = Trust.

When they say they have "Faith" in God, what they mean is that they already know that God exists, but that they also know that they can trust God completely.

So for them, the very idea of "losing faith" or even having "weak faith" is a meaningless concept. After all, if you've already convinced yourself that you know God exists, and "faith" to you means "trust", then it's going to be easy for you to "trust" in a God that you have already convinced yourself that you know exists.

So yes, I'm aware of these two different concepts of "faith".

Surprisingly (even to me) I have far more faith of the latter kind than I do of the former kind.

By this I mean, that I have complete "Trust" in God, even though I intellectually realize that there may not even be a God.

That might be hard for some people to understand. But it's not hard for me to understand because, for me, if a God exists then by definition God must be trustworthy.

An untrustworthy God would be a demon.

So it's a given that if God exists God is trustworthy by our very definition of what we mean by our term "God".

So I have complete faith in God in terms of trust.

Whether or not God exists is an entirely different kind of faith. I have faith that God does exist. It may not sound like it to people who worship dogma. But to me God isn't dogma. I have absolutely no faith or trust in any dogma. Nor would I like to place my faith in any dogma.

I have yet to see dogma worthy of my faith or my trust.

[Divine Insight]

What if a loving God exists?

If a loving God exists, She will love me of course.

Isn't that what loving God's do?

I have absolutely nothing to fear from a truly loving God.

The only God's I would need to fear are hateful jealous Gods.

But it seems to me that a hateful jealous God would actually be a Demon.

By definition a God cannot be a Demon and vice versa.

So I have nothing to fear from any TRUE God.

[Divine Insight]

This chart should help clear some things up:

Based on this chart I'm an Agnostic Theist.

[Brian Of Nazareth]

I have come to the conclusion that either no god exist, or the creator is not a personal god. If the creator isn't a personal god, then it doesn't matter if I believe or not.

Exactly. I am in total agreement with your conclusion here Richard.

I have come to the very same conclusion with one possible variation:

You say, "If the creator isn't a personal god, then it doesn't matter if I believe or not."

I'm convinced that even if the creator is some form of personal god it still wouldn't matter whether we believe or not.

Why should that even be important to a personal god?

If there exists a conscious sentient creator who actually desires that we believe in him/her/it, the most intelligent thing such a creator could do is make itself known to us in no uncertain terms.

If a personal god is "hiding" from us, then I think it's safe to say that it doesn't even want us to believe in it. Why would it bother to hide if it was important that we acknowledge it?

~~~~

My personal tenacity toward a continued spiritual faith is not driven by a fear that some god would be upset if I didn't at least try to believe in it. My continued persistence to have a love affair with spirituality is two-fold.

1. I confess that it's an enticing dream.

So I have "faith" as "hope". (which is what faith truly is, IMHO).

Only because I feel that a one-shot lifetime seems like such a waste of universe.

So my "faith" is based on the pure romantic hope that there might be something more to reality than meets the eye. It's not based on a fear that some potentially angry creator might need to be pacified by having me cower down to his ego. That a vision of spirituality that, to me, is not even as attractive as pure secular atheism.

2. For me, a purely secular universe is just as miraculous and mysterious as a mystical reality.

From my perspective Atheism (Hardcore Secular Atheism) is indeed just as much a leap of faith as a belief in a spiritual existence. (I will agree with the OP on that point)

As far as I'm concerned a non-spiritual reality is just as absurd as a spiritual reality.

They are both equally absurd. Neither one is anymore "logical" or "reasonable" to my way of thinking.

So since they are on precisely equal footing why not lean toward the more inviting one?

Of course, as a I say, a spiritual picture is only inviting if it's truly divine and benevolent. It's not inviting if it turns out to be an angry egotist who will cast non-believers into eternal damnation.

So for me, it really comes down to choices.

I can chose to believe whatever I want, and so I imagine the best possible scenario I can imagine and "hope" (i.e. have Faith) that this dream could somehow (against all odds) potentially be true.

I certainly have nothing to lose.

If the universe turns out to be purely secular I haven't lost a thing.

If the angry jealous-God religions turn out to be true, then I still haven't lost a thing because I could never worship or love such a demon anyway. So he may as well cast me into his stupid hell fire. Nothing lost there, because to serve such a lunatic for eternity would itself be hell anyway. May as well, just go straight to hell in the first place.

Epistemological solipsism is the only viable viewpoint?

[Artie]

Now lets look at the amount knowledge that a human being can possess. It is obvious that even the smartest person who has ever lived couldn't possess even 1% of all the knowledge in existance. But lets imagine that there existed an Atheist who possessed 1% of all the knowledge in existance. This is of course a huge exaggeration, but for the sake of this argument lets say that someone did possess this amount of knowledge. If this person was honest, they would have to admit that the other 99% of knowledge that they didn't possess could have the evidence that proves God's existance.

Or the existence of any of the other of the thousands of gods man has believed and believes in. A Christian doesn't have any problems stating categorically that none of the other gods man has believed and believes in don't exist though even lacking 99% of the knowledge too.

So as you can see from this very simple example, it is impossible to absolutely state that there is no God.

Correction: "that there are no gods".

To conclude: If you claim to be an Atheist, then with respect I say to you that you are actually and Agnostic in the true sense, although I can respect that you may have chosen not believe in God without proof and in that sense you have chosen to be an Atheist, but your claim to be an atheist is not a scientific one, rather a belief or religion.

Atheism is non-belief in deities. Asantaism is non-belief in Santa. Therefore asantaism is a belief or religion.

To say that there is no God requires absolute knowledge. Knowledge of not only our 4 known and understood dimensions but all the higher dimensions as well and that would be impossible for a 3 dimensional creature such as yourself.

Tell that to all believers in God who say that no other gods exist.

However, If you had absolute knowledge then yes God would exist, because you would be God.

Or I could be any of the other 107 creator gods listed on wikipedia.

On the other hand, to say that there is a God only requires personal experience or an understanding that the design

Apparent design.

in creation warrants a designer. But ultimately there really can only be 2 types of people, believers and agnostics. Those who have seen first hand or can see evidence that gold exists in China and those who believe that gold doesn't exist in China, but can never really be sure that this is so.
Also, Atheists often say they have no faith. This is simply not the case. It has to be said that having faith in nothing is not the same as having no faith. Faith that believes that everything came from nothing is a belief and trust that this is the case even in the absence of proof.

We have proof. http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/ ... thing.html

Atheism goes against Nature

Throughout the history of the world, the majority of people have believed in God. There seems to be something built in the human mind that makes us want to believe.
Over the last decade some really startling facts have been found that show that children have an innate belief in God. Dr Justin Barrett, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford Centre for Anthropology and Mind, states “The preponderance of scientific evidence for the past 10 years or so has shown that a lot more seems to be built into the natural development of children’s minds than we once thought, including a predisposition to see the natural world as designed and purposeful and that some kind of intelligent being is behind that purpose…� He adds that “If we threw a handful [of children] on an island and they raised themselves…they would believe in God�.. To put it simply, his answer as to why anyone would believe in God is that, our minds are designed to do so . Disbelief in God is something which is unnatural to the human being. Oxford University development psychologist Dr Olivera Petrovich, who is an expert in the Psychology of Religion states that, belief in God develops naturally and that ‘‘atheism is definitely an acquired position’’ .
So where did this natural belief in a creator come from?

Evolution. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... 41022.html"Scientists say they have located the parts of the brain that control religious faith. And the research proves, they contend, that belief in a higher power is an evolutionary asset that helps human survival."

[Divine Insight]

Epistemological solipsism is the only viable viewpoint?

Who said anything about solipsism? I personally don't believe in solipsism.

I've considered it, and certainly can't disprove it, but just the same I reject it on grounds that it just doesn't "feel right". Pantheism or panentheism are far more likely to be the case, IMHO, and I can't disprove them either. On the contrary they make more sense to me than solipsism.

[Divine Insight]

"Scientists say they have located the parts of the brain that control religious faith. And the research proves, they contend, that belief in a higher power is an evolutionary asset that helps human survival."

Scientific research shows that belief in a higher power is an evolutionary asset that helps human survival?

How are the secularists reacting to this "scientific research"?

Secularists often argue against religion or "magical thinking" proclaiming that is offers no benefits to human survival and only results in the perpetuation of superstitions and ignorance.

But now you're suggesting that scientific research "proves", according to some scientists, that a belief in a higher power is scientifically beneficial to humanity?

That's rather interesting.

It seems to be that this would be something quite difficult to "prove" scientifically. It seems to me that there would be far too many subjective assumptions required to draw such a conclusion.

I can personally see where mystical or spiritual beliefs can be either a benefit or a hazard. That can all depend what individuals associate with those beliefs.

A belief that witches are possessed by demons and need to be burned alive on stakes doesn't seem to be very beneficial to humanity as far as I can see.

But someone who does good works to improve the quality of the life of the community because of their faith in a higher power, would obviously be benificial.

But then again, how could it ever be shown or demonstrated scientifically, that the very same person might not behave in the very same way even if they had no spiritual beliefs?

I highly question "scientific conclusions" about things that would be extremely difficult to demonstrate in any concrete repeatable way.

It seems to me that historically we have enough "scientific evidence" that a belief in a higher power can have a positive or negative affect on a culture with equal probability.

We see just as many atrocities being committed in the name of a higher power as we see good works. Some may even argue that the atrocities outweigh the good works, at least in terms of the magnitude of their devastation, if not in the frequency of their occurrence.

It seems to me that the your quote above would be a good topic for a thread in its own right.

In fact, here it is: http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 767#499767

Does a belief in a higher power benefit or adversely affect humanity?

In light of today's suicide bombings in the name of Allah, I'm sure that many people are going to suggest that adversity is currently outweighing any good that might be done in the name of a higher power.

Just my thoughts.

[A Troubled Man]

OP was merely copied pasted from other sites. It's unlikely Kanzulhuda even read or understood it let alone respond to anything here.