The Atheism/Agnosticism Thread

Do you think God exists?


  • Total voters
    231

Haldilal

लड़ते लड़ते जीना है, लड़ते लड़ते मरना है
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
16,617
Likes
55,237
Country flag
"Rejection of belief" is also a belief, in the end everyone has to believe in something or the other.
Ya'll Nibbiars rejection of belief is not belief but clear rejection of belief because they are confused. You are not atheist. You are confused. Spoilt with too many choices.
 

Srinivas_K

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
7,211
Likes
12,034
Country flag
"Rejection of belief" is also a belief, in the end everyone has to believe in something or the other.
Rejection of belief is not belief, he can be a seeker.

Belief is fine as long as one keeps it to himself.
 

asaffronladoftherisingsun

Dharma Dispatcher
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
6,989
Likes
40,876
Country flag
Rejection of belief is not belief, he can be a seeker.

Belief is fine as long as one keeps it to himself.
The point @ezsasa made was how modern day athiesm just replaces one kind of exclusivism for truth with different kind of exclusivism for truth and is rooted in the same two valued logic that is the hallmark of abrahmic cults. They are not seeking for truth but making exclusivist truth claims on flawed binary logic.
 
Last edited:

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
Mod
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
22,864
Likes
93,773
Country flag
Rejection of belief is not belief, he can be a seeker.

Belief is fine as long as one keeps it to himself.
"seeker" is an Dharmic way of looking at things.

The current lot of vocal atheists, they have defined the world for themselves in binaries, especially the ones who have come from ex-abrahamic background. they presume all religions are like abrahamic religions. they don't believe in "abrahamic belief systems" by extension they don't believe in any religion.

we won't find a modern day atheist who seeks to learn dharmic way of life, they reject it outright, dharmic way allows for seeking knowledge without restricting oneself to divinity. hence athiests are not seekers either.

here i am referring to atheists who have publicly stated positions on Hinduism.
 

Srinivas_K

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
7,211
Likes
12,034
Country flag
"seeker" is an Dharmic way of looking at things.

The current lot of vocal atheists, they have defined the world for themselves in binaries, especially the ones who have come from ex-abrahamic background. they presume all religions are like abrahamic religions. they don't believe in "abrahamic belief systems" by extension they don't believe in any religion.

we won't find a modern day atheist who seeks to learn dharmic way of life, they reject it outright, dharmic way allows for seeking knowledge without restricting oneself to divinity. hence athiests are not seekers either.

here i am referring to atheists who have publicly stated positions on Hinduism.
Atheists basically do have a bit of reasoning , one of the main reason they reject belief systems.

Regarding Atheists of ex abhrahamic religions. I am not sure how that movement progresses.
 

asaffronladoftherisingsun

Dharma Dispatcher
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
6,989
Likes
40,876
Country flag
Does God Exist? Jinasena, in his 9th work, Mahapurana, offers compelling argument and demolishes christianity and islam. (quoting from a thread)

1. Some foolish men declare the creator made the world. The doctrine that the world was created is ill advised and should be rejected.

2. If God created the world, where was he before the creation? If you say he was transcendent then and needed no support, where is he now? How could God have made this world without any raw material?

3. If you say that he made this first, and then the world, you are faced with an endless regression. If you declare that this raw material arose naturally you fall into another fallacy.

4. For the whole universe might thus have been its own creator, and have arisen quite naturally. If God created the world by an act of his own will, without any raw material, then it is just his will and nothing else - and who will believe this silly nonsense?

5. If he is ever perfect and complete, how could the will to create have arisen in him? If, on the other hand, he is not perfect, he could no more create the universe than a potter could. If he is form-less, action-less and all-embracing, how could he have created the world?

6. Such a soul, devoid of all morality, would have no desire to create anything. If he is perfect, he does not strive for the three aims of man, so what advantage would he gain by creating the universe?

7. If you say that he created to no purpose because it was his nature to do so, then God is pointless. If he c
reated in some kind of sport, it was the sport of a foolish child, leading to trouble.

8. If he created because of the Karma of embodied beings [acquired in a previous creation] he is not Almighty but subordinate to something else. If out of love for living beings and need of them he made the world, why did he not take creation wholly blissful free from misfortune?

9. If he were transcendent he would not create, for he would be free: Nor if involved in transmigration, for then he would not be almighty. Thus the doctrine that the world was created by God makes no sense at all.

10. And God commits great sin in slaying the children whom he himself created. If you say that he slays only to destroy evil beings, why did he create such beings in the first place?

11. Good men should combat the believer in divine creation, maddened by an evil doctrine. Know that the world is uncreated, as time itself is, without beginning or end, and is based on the principles, life and rest.

12. Uncreated and indestructible, it endures under the compulsion of its own nature.
 

doreamon

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
2,960
Likes
14,801
Country flag
A debate between sam harris and rupert spira on material model vs consciousness model .

 

Bhumihar

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
10,587
Likes
43,135
Country flag
One of the many reason I disapprove of the the notion of absence of God is Justice and morality.
There is no a absolute justice in this world, a powerful person with resources and means can subvert any act of justice. Hence there is is no compulsion to adhere moral values.

The presence of God is a reassuring Mechanism or say a cooing mechanism. The all seeing one who can deliver justice for pain and suffering even if the human justice system fails.

Morality without god is meaningless, there are powerful people who can torment your friends and family, kill them get away with it and proceed to live a life without any guilt.
Only God works as a last resort than.

@ezsasa @Optimistic Nihilist @Indx TechStyle @asaffronladoftherisingsun

Do u guys beleive in a absolute Justice?
 
Last edited:

mokoman

Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2020
Messages
2,710
Likes
15,577
Country flag
for atheist and agnostics i recommend


just pray 1 time a day , great discount coupons and less time in traffic awaits you !!!


Frenly reminder.

looks fake .

hard to believe anyone can be this stupid :rofl:

"seeker" is an Dharmic way of looking at things.

The current lot of vocal atheists, they have defined the world for themselves in binaries, especially the ones who have come from ex-abrahamic background. they presume all religions are like abrahamic religions. they don't believe in "abrahamic belief systems" by extension they don't believe in any religion.

we won't find a modern day atheist who seeks to learn dharmic way of life, they reject it outright, dharmic way allows for seeking knowledge without restricting oneself to divinity. hence athiests are not seekers either.

here i am referring to atheists who have publicly stated positions on Hinduism.
IMHO most atheists 'lean bit' towards dharma religions - especially Buddhism.
 

Bhumihar

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
10,587
Likes
43,135
Country flag
looks fake .

hard to believe anyone can be this stupid :rofl:
People like this don't say it and they may not belive in this as well but there words actions will make it seems like this.
 

Optimistic Nihilist

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
1,292
Likes
6,389
Country flag
for atheist and agnostics i recommend


just pray 1 time a day , great discount coupons and less time in traffic awaits you !!!
The Flying Spaghetti Monster Argument. Sounds very genius and sensible at first glance, less so after a careful scrutiny.

The Monster is composed of two large meatballs surrounded by a mass of spaghetti topped with two eyeballs. It’s evident that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is supposed to be a finite, physical object which, for some unexplained reason, is not perceptible to our senses.

Great fun. But now what is the point of the parody? What does it show? It’s striking that this parody does nothing to call into question either the legitimacy or necessity of the inference to an intelligent designer of the universe.

It's not as if we can infer nothing about the Designer of the universe on the basis of the specified complexity of the cosmos. Principally, what we can infer is that there exists a personal, and, hence, self-conscious, volitional being of inconceivably great intelligence who designed the universe. If people really believed that to be true, they would be wide-eyed and open-mouthed with astonishment, rather than mocking and derisive.

Moreover, it’s plausible that any ultimate explanation must involve a personal being which is incorporeal. For any being composed of material stuff will exhibit precisely that specified complexity.

The contingency argument, for example, proves the existence of a metaphysically necessary, uncaused, timeless, spaceless, immaterial, personal Creator of the universe. That conclusion is also incompatible with the Sufficient Reason of all things being the Flying Spaghetti Monster, since as a physical object (even if invisible to our senses) he can be neither metaphysically necessary, timeless, spaceless, nor immaterial.

The kalam cosmological argument, for example, gives us grounds for believing in the existence of a beginningless, uncaused, timeless, spaceless, changeless, immaterial, enormously powerful, Personal Creator of the universe. Again, a being with such attributes cannot be anything like the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The ontological argument gives us reason to think that God, as the greatest conceivable being, is metaphysically necessary and maximally excellent, that is to say, omnipotent, omniscient, and all-good. Nothing like the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

I think you can see that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is vastly overrated, both as a parody and as a being. As a parody, he fails to show that an inference to an intelligent designer of the universe is either illegitimate or unwarranted. What the parody shows is that we are not justified in attributing to our explanatory postulates arbitrary properties that are not justified by the evidence.

Believers have always known this. That’s why the attributes that are associated with God are qualities like simplicity, perfection, goodness, omnipresence eternity etc.

As a being, the Flying Spaghetti Monster comes up drastically deficient as an explanation of those phenomena which lie at the basis of the arguments for God’s existence. Those arguments require cumulatively a being which is the metaphysically necessary, self-existent, beginningless, uncaused, timeless, spaceless, immaterial, personal, omnipotent, omniscient Creator and Designer of the universe, who is perfectly good, whose nature is the standard of goodness, and whose commands constitute our moral duties.

The real lesson to be learned from the case of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is that it shows how completely out of touch our popular culture is with traditions and religion. One might as well be speaking a foreign language. That people could think that belief in God is anything like the groundless belief in a fantasy monster shows how utterly ignorant they are of the works of philosophers.

No doubt part of the fault lies with equally ignorant religious people who have no answer when called upon to give a reason for the hope within and who therefore give the impression of arbitrary and groundless belief. But it must also be attributed to poor education, intellectual laziness, and a lack of curiosity. We have no excuse for such lame caricatures of theistic belief as belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top