Atheists and proof cont….

[Kdtym10]

A carry on from the previous thread

I agree. I don’t understand how obviously intelligent people believe in a god, the resurrection, virgin birth and things like walking on water. Scary what control having a faith has over some people.

Of course I’ve looked at it from all
perspectIves. For a while as a teenager I was an atheist due to attending catholic schools.

However, I realised I was deceiving myself out of fear, out of a rational rejection of religion. Inside I knew there was more. I did a lot of reading? A lot of searching inwardly, a lot of analysing of scriptures of all kinds.

it was this research and inward knowing that led me to where I am now.

it’s interesting that I come across a lot of people with cross phobias because of their upbringing. A lot of them are searching for something “more” They will tie themselves in knots to avoid the obvious conclusion about spirituality, clinging to their rational minds life a life preserver in the beautiful sea of existence, scared to look beneath the waves, scared of what lies beneath, even though it’s where we originate.

But of course people are different, I can see that spirituality is just something that some are not in the right place to experience, that is fine, for me it is part of the totality of a spiritual experience. In Kabbalistic terms it’s the10th sepherot of Malkuth.

My original question is not a judgement nor is an attempt to convert. My cosmology tells me they are in the right place for them now. It’s a question arising from the statements of atheists on another thread which made me curious.

Have you ever looked into the symbology rather than literal interpretation of those things. Platonic symbolism plays a massive part in understanding the New Testament.

No need to apologise, you made yourself very clear

But bias is present from the moment someone commissions some research

Symbolic interpretation can be interesting but they aren’t factual or truths.

My original question is not a judgement nor is an attempt to convert. My cosmology tells me they are in the right place for them now.

@Kdtym10 -what do you mean “for them now”?

Also interesting is the often held view of those with faith that those without are missing something in some way. And I'm not sure if that's to further validate faith itself as in I've found god and those without are the poorer for not therefore finding god is correct and right in and of itself-or a clung to view that adds a sense of individual satisfaction.

Following on, as an atheist for my conscious state, I do not feel I'm lacking anything for not being spiritual, I'd wonder what it is considered to be then, based on the feeling of others own experiences applied to me or the observation of my existence by those who have faith.

Obviously understanding that my own experience of life, my conscious experience is personal to me and therefore out of reach of others assessment and ultimately perception free from their own bias.

I think it is from the perspective of people who have the experience of the mundane and spiritual.

I would look at it this way. My mum has hardly ever left her home town. She considers everything she needs is there. I have travelled across the globe, experienced many different sights, experienced many different cultures, foods, religions, people. She’s heard me talk about say Italy, she’s never been. Her only experience of the place is through other’s experience. Does she feel she’s missing out by having not visited? For most of her life probably not, because she has never experienced the joy travel can bring, to walk in others footsteps in different parts of the world, people who experience life differently to people in her home town. How does she even know Italy is there, only by trusting in the experience of others.

No of course we will never know whether she would have experienced joy from these things, we will never really know why she didn’t want to leave her home town. Would travel have enhanced her life. But we do know that she has a very insular way of viewing the world. One that hasn’t been expanded. Does she feel like she has missed out, she says not, and after all can you miss something you have never experienced. But now towards the end of her life, she has become increasingly negative about anyone travelling, however close and I sometimes think this is borne out of regret and jealousy. But who knows. As you say, experience is subjective. No one can tell what others are experiencing inside of themselves. This is where we experience spirituality. Therefore, no one can say it is right or wrong. A person can only say of their own experience or lack thereof in their own internal universe.

As above, so below, as within so without - to quote Jesus (Gospel of Thomas) and to paraphrase Newton’s translation of the Emerald Tablet of Hermitic philosophy.

Going to declare here that I am a complete non-believer, and I do think its unfair for you to ask what evidence and then reject the answer, but on the other hand many seem to be thinking science from the 1600's - which isn't unreasonable, given the school narrative.

I am unclear why you keep referring to the physical and spiritual as if this is a defined separation - scientific proof also keeps on being mentioned, but am not aware of any scientific proofs to demonstrate a hypothesis.

Mathematics is not part of any physical domain, it is abstract. It defines the arguments that lead to undeniable proof - including proof of a negative. Anything else is simply not proven - like most theories, maybe this is the ultimate spiritual plane.

Religion/Science/People look to provide ways to explain and then harness those explanations in new contexts - the explanations don’t need to be 100% accurate, nor have reasoning why, but do need to be universal within our extent of experience. I don’t think religion is any different to science in this context - religious belief and theoretical science does the same thing, proposes theories and interpretations that humans can understand, and then aims to use those explanations.

Scientists with firm beliefs have also been caught in the same way as believers in religions, believing so much in their own theories, that they cannot accept it when the (highly probably) truth is that they are wrong is discovered - or don’t accept that without some evidence, a theory is just that - a curiosity, but useless in its own right. Personal investment is very strong.

On the other hand, something really stands out - when people use non-religious theories that have no evidence, the good theories lead to discovery of a new part to reality, advance understanding, and achieve a change that nobody can deny. You may not understand special relativity and quantum mechanics (or you may), and nobody knows why they should work as well as they seem, but you have to accept that GPS does work, and could not unless those theories were a good approximation to the truth.

On the other hand, nothing has been shown to be achieved by a belief in god - as a concept the theory doesn’t seem to offer anything beyond the absence in god can provide. This doesn’t mean that its wrong, it could simply be too subtle for the difference to be noticed, like many other theories over the years - but it also means the belief in the theory or not makes no difference.

I would suggest that most things that have previously been attributed to god have now been demonstrated to be attributable to mechanisms that the god theory is not required to explain. Although any theory can be revised, a theory that offers nothing in positive evidence, but has many claims demonstrated to be incorrect does taint those who then try to claim the same theory or derivative of still applies. This is the opposite of a newer model becoming more accurate than an existing good model.

I might be going too far, but would suggest it is reasonable that it should be accepted by all that some god (once clearly defined) theory may be a plausible theory, but it also shows quite a lack of critical thinking to not accept that a theory without evidence demonstrating any difference whether true or not, and especially one which has had so many claims showed to be false should be given much weight, and then used to provide a path through life.

Why not join the thinking proven to move understanding forward rather than follow in the footsteps of those whom have been continuously been demonstrated to be wrong? It doesn't mean eventually there might not be something there, but playing the lottery seems to have much better odds.

Firstly, I haven’t “rejected” anyone’s answer. I might have questioned it further, but this is different, although clearly, for some, the difference is too subtle.

Why do I talk about the physical v spiritual? Because “mundane” seems to be seen in a negative way. But you are correct it doesn’t totally encapsulate the position. I have been using physical to mean the opposite of spiritual. It’s probably something influenced by Blake to draw the distinction between the two in this way.

Maths is an interesting one. It’s between the physical (or mundane) and spiritual worlds, a foot in both camps if you like. Of course Pythagorus and his followers were probably the first to be most keenly aware of this. Numbers and geometry are very much of the spiritual world too.

Im not sure “spirituality” has had many claims proven to be false - the various wrappers (called religion) can have many holes picked in them but so can many scientific theories. But I would suggest it lacks critical thinking to reject something common to nearly every civilisation which has ever existed and state that it is wrong and made up. It is something scientific methodology was never designed to measure, but something humans have always valued and arguably understood within.

I’m interested in how you have calculated the odds of their being a divine force for comparison with winning the lottery.

@Kdtym10

You avoided engagement with any of the core discussion I note, and yes I think you have rejected people's answer by claiming its not possible; its either not possible because there is no discernible evidence or because its not true.

Maths doesn't have any connection with the physical, it's purely abstract and does not require any connection to any physical reality. Exactly which concept of maths are you connecting to the physical - the pythag theorem certainly is purely abstract.

So earth being at the centre of the universe, humans being different to other animals, are these not disproven? It only takes a single piece of evidence to disprove a theory, yet these were held up as proof of the divine.

The number of people believing something has no bearing on its truth. In fact history has shown the opposite - the flat world, the clockwork universe, elements of the world, nature of light, concept of time....

Not sure what you mean - yes of course scientific theories can have holes picked in them - its shows they are not true by definition. On the other hand, as I said above as long as they can show something that makes a difference there is something there as an approximation - this is the difference, that no divine theory has ever shown anything.

The lottery odds are known, and people win at it in line with those odds. Billions have believed in the divine but have not found a single piece of evidence to show others, so the empirical measurement of each demonstrates that the long term estimation probabilities are very much in favour of the lottery. Again, this doesn't mean the truth is different, but probabilities are either calculated from maths or estimated based on evidence - neither is looking good for the divine. In practice, long term estimators always tend towards the real probabilities - so it's going to be very close to zero.

How have you estimated the odds? Generally people look for 0.95 to conclude it's likely - often much higher.

I don’t believe I “avoided engagement” with any of the main arguments -perhaps you could link to some examples of where I have done this so I can address it. Please note that where I have stated that I don’t believe scientific methodology is suitable for analysing the spiritual )for the reasons I have given) this is not ignoring other’s position but stating my own.

Maths, whilst abstract has become a language of science as a way to describe the physical, maths and geometry/maths have similarly been used as a language/symbols of the spiritual world. As the followers of the mystic mathematician Pythagoras (The Divine Brotherhood) stated “All is number” it is perhaps the bridge between worlds in this way, a common language, some see it as factual, others poetic.

The oft quoted widespread belief in the flat earth theory is largely a product of the 19th century Draper - White conflict theory that’s been previously discussed. Many other theories were readily accepted as incorrect by the church. But again it has little to do with spirituality more organised religion.

To me, divinity shows everything, for me it makes sense of the world. It doesn’t have to be universal in application. Why would it?

But, I would argue. Many more people have found the Divine than have won the lottery. What you are actually arguing is that winning the lottery is more probable than producing scientific evidence of the Divine which brings me back to the very argument I have been making all along, that scientific methodology is not the way to measure the existence of Divinity.

I would say less people have found the divine than have had it thrust upon them. Being indoctrinated is not the same as discovering your own spirituality. Conflating the two does not an argument make.

But you have no way of knowing how many would have found the divine anyway? Some people leave the religion into which they are born and others stay, others join from a former position of atheism. Others do not join a religion but find within them a deep spirituality. There is no black and white, but a connection of spiritual belief. To stay with something and develop within it spiritually or to find it, it doesn’t matter.

Many more people have found the Divine than have won the lottery.

I doubt that many people actually searched for and happened to found a 'god' as there is zero evidence of such a deity!

Most likely people are encouraged and indoctrinated to believe in a god. They are promised eternal life and happiness (carrot) and hell (stick) if they refuse. Many people are sadly not very critical.

Oh I think you’re coming from a place where you’re not giving very much credit to the capacity of those who have found the Divine either within an established religion or outside of it.

We are back to the evidence thing. Don’t you think personal experience is enough for these people?

Interesting conversation. Disclosure, I profess to the faith of Islam.

I found it rather curious and strange that Atheist belief of "no god" is actually the first phrase of the Islamic testimony of faith (shahada).

Shahada is the testimony one testifies to become a Muslim and it goes as such:

"la ilaha illa llahu, Muḥammadun rasulu llah"

There is no god but God; Muhammad is the Messenger of God.

So, the question is, just need to find the correct God. In Islam, it is the One and only God.

God is not for one group or ethnicity or culture but God is for everyone, whether someone chooses to believe in Him or not.

Hence, religion for God is a choice. As with everything there are consequence.

God is not for one group or ethnicity or culture but God is for everyone, whether someone chooses to believe in Him or not.

Hence, religion for God is a choice. As with everything there are consequence.

@Deenforme - how can a god be for me when I don’t believe in their existence? What are the consequences I will face as a nonbeliever?

Sounds like the usual religious threats for someone daring to think independently and live very happily as an atheist.

We are back to the evidence thing. Don’t you think personal experience is enough for these people?

We're back to the same argument against. Why does a religious person’s personal life experience trump a non-religious person’s personal experience?

An atheist could have had the exact moment of clarity, of “seeing the light”, only their moment of clarity was understanding that god does not exist.

If you are willing to count a religious person’s moment of clarity as proof, you cannot deny an atheist’s moment of clarity as proof without undermining your entire argument.

@Parker231, And you're absolutely right. No one can force or make you believe if you choose not to, that's yours and everybody else's right.

However, I obviously cannot talk about the concept of who God is in other religions except for what is mentioned in the Qur'an about Judaism and Christianity, which are referred to as the people of the book, meaning, God sent down revelations to the Prophets and Messengers such as Moses, David and Jesus (peace be upon them all).

However, Muslims do not recognise much of what those two great religions practice today because according to the Qur'an, those scriptures have been corrupted by those who were entrusted to keep them safe.

Qur'an, therefore is the final ahs last revelation until end of time. There will not be any new Messengers or books revealed other than Prophet Jesus returning to kill the anti-Christ (Dajjal).

Going back to your point about consequences and threats for who choose not believe, well, that's for God to decide, on the Day of Judgement.

However, if someone who doesn't believe in the existence of God then that shouldn't be of concern, and only those who do believe but also do evil deeds will worry about that day and the weighing of their good and bad deeds.

I'm biased but God is real as you and I are walking on this earth when we weren't a thing to be mentioned. But, here we are debating about God.

@Kdtym10

To me, divinity shows everything, for me it makes sense of the world. It doesn’t have to be universal in application. Why would it?

if it isn't universal, then it can't be a theory that explains the world. If there is anywhere the theory doesn't apply, the theory is false.

I do believe this is an interesting perspective though- as its often how many other theories work, that it needs to be related to something we can understand despite the underlying reality not being understood.

As I'm not a believer, it's difficult to understand, so what are a few examples of things explained to you by the divinity that would be unexplained otherwise? This I believe would give me a stronger understanding of what I'm missing.

As a follow up, if the divinity was false, how would this change your thinking regarding these matters, what difference would it make?

Can't really understand what your taking about regarding maths - its a universal language that allows theories to be expressed and consequences to be found. Humanity uses maths - it's not just science, and any other civilisation would find the same truths. I'm not clear other than copying the symbols, what consequences maths has demonstrated in the spiritual - but am keen to find out.

Regarding organised religion, are you indicating that the great religions are in fact based on a false divinity, as their teaching are clearly wrong and proven to be over time? If so, that removes many of the billions you mention. If not, then we have to take the failings of these religions as strong evidence that any such theories are wrong.

I never asked for scientific evidence compared to the lottery - there needs to be something that can be pointed to that is unexplained and therefore gives an indication of such a divinity. All the examples of history claiming to do so have turned out false - so I'm not sure back to your original point, why ask what evidence would do, if you're unable to show anything, never mind something approaching something that could be scientifically verified? We know for certain that something doesn't need to be true for someone to believe something, so that certainly isn't anything, but I'd be open to anything as you explain above that makes sense of something in the world that otherwise cannot be explained.

@Deenforme - I’d hope people live a good life of their own volition and not because they are scared by a religious punishment. The only day of judgement which will affect us is if Putin presses the button.
God can’t affect non believers as he doesn’t exist.

@Parker231, The proof that you and others are looking for are already around us in the universe and within ourselves. We just need to look for what exactly will satisfy ourselves to believe.

There are those who will never believe no matter what proofs and evidences you bring. Even if the angels were to descend upon the earth, they will say surely it's all a magic.

If I may quote few verses to explain what I'm trying to say.

Interpretation of the meaning of Qur'an in English.

"Ask ˹them, O Prophet (Muhammad)˺, “Imagine if this ˹Quran˺ is ˹truly˺ from Allah (God) and you deny it: who can be more astray than those who have gone too far in opposition ˹to the truth˺?”

We (Allah) will show them Our signs in the universe and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that this ˹Quran˺ is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is a Witness over all things?

They are truly in doubt of the meeting with their Lord! ˹But˺ He is indeed Fully Aware of everything." {Al-Qur'an, Surah (Chapter) Fussilat (Explained in detail), verses 52-54}.