If You Could Ask An Atheist A Question, What Would It Be?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Galloglasses' post='1577888' date='Jun 20 2008, 06:33 PM']Also, for laughs, next time someone rails against you about the dark ages and religious wars causing the most deaths and torture, tell them compare the past 1900 years to the 20th century, the most secular in all of Human History and the most bloodiest and horrible. And that more Athiest leaders in that century have caused all this compared to two millenia of Religiously minded leaders.[/quote]
I do try! Only trouble is my history isn't sharp enough to do it offhand.
Pol Pot was atheist, was he not? I don't know a ton about him, only that he was a bad, bad guy.
Stalin, all those USSR dictators, Hitler... was whatever the heck he said... Norse? Whatever. Probably I could think of a couple more, but could I specifically compare facts and represent us well? I don't think so, unfortunately.
Maybe I should write a script.

[JustJ]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1575788' date='Jun 19 2008, 12:41 AM']My innocent until proven guilty thing was mostly off topic. The first part was the gist of my point.
It seems to me that science can't answer everything with certainty either. Obviously it's done extremely well, and is definitely one of the greatest accomplishments of mankind, but you can't prove beyond any doubt how the universe came to exist, or even the earth for that matter.
Of course, it has reasonable support.
On the other hand, so does God.
The only difference is that in your opinion, our reasonable support isn't reasonable enough. The same could be said about any scientific theory. Well almost any. Pythagorean's Theorem seems pretty airtight to me, not being a mathematician by ant stretch. ;D[/quote]
If the natural order of things is actually the direct work of God, he's really good with the humble part because he leaves no trace of a divine intelligence to take credit for, just a list of set rules of how things behave. No intelligence is shown. Things simply happen as they should.
[quote name='rkwright' post='1576101' date='Jun 19 2008, 12:32 PM']You've made a lot of responses in the past day or so!

A question on one of the responses... Your response to the Aquinas arguments, is asking why can't there be an infinite series. If there is an infinite series, can you explain why there is motion at all?[/quote]
To be perfectly honest, I haven't the slightest idea, if this is the case. The only good answer is, if there is an infinite series of motion, cause/effect, etc all the way back, that means that things must have always been in motion. Forever.
[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1576128' date='Jun 19 2008, 01:00 PM']Uh oh, this sounds a lot like infinite divisibility.
*This* is where it's great to be a theist! We don't have to worry about frying our brains wondering exactly why the universe doesn't just fall apart with all this theoretical and extremely daunting (and scary) stuff.
If I were talking to people in real life at the moment, I'd do that "raise the roof" move... Or maybe the sprinkler. Hah![/quote]
Check out string theory and quantum physics. There are likely a loooooot of parallel universes to ours that went completely different. Of course, the only ones that have any people to ask why things went perfectly for them were the lucky ones in the universes that went that way. Imagine you are a molecule of water in a puddle. You observe that the hole appears to perfectly fit our needs! What that molecule didn't notice was that the universe, the puddle here, is simply the way it is, and the only people around to ask any questions, thinking so vainly that they are the perfection that everything was created for, are unaware that they are the fluid figure that conforms to its surroundings, not needing the surroundings to be tailored perfectly to it.
[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1576351' date='Jun 19 2008, 04:45 PM']I'd just like to hear their explanation for this:
[url="http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html"]Eucharistic Miracle at Lanciano[/url]
One of the most miraculous, in my opinion.[/quote]
If that is true, I cannot think of an explanation for it. However, it was unfortunately an occurrence prior to modern scientific, skeptical thought, and so could have been a mistaken event if not a total fabrication with few openly questioning its legitimacy.
[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1576370' date='Jun 19 2008, 05:25 PM']In other words, I was looking for JustJ's response.[/quote]
I'm glad you recognize the difference. I don't want to be thought of as the mad-at-his-parents 13yo atheist who knows no reason not to believe just as much as he knows no reason to believe, and does so only in a cry for attention or trying to get out of going to church Sunday mornings.

(Note: I'm not saying this of the other poster. I have no idea about his circumstances. I'm just recalling myself prior to my venture into religion which came shortly before my falling away again.)

(And for the record, in the above-mentioned "venture into religion", I came to the conclusion that if Christianity was correct, Catholic was the only way to go, from a very logical and well-reasoned point of view that I may elaborate on at request.)
[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1576374' date='Jun 19 2008, 05:29 PM']This is an absolutely incredible miracle.
This goes far beyond 'science just can't explain it *yet*'.
If you need evidence, this is evidence. If you're in court and the defence shows you a sample of DNA, you can't look at that and say "maybe someone else's DNA mutated. It might happen, science just can't explain why yet."[/quote]
a good, near-complete line of solid reasoning. I mean, the truth is, it might happen, but with no reasonable means for this change to happen, it can be ruled out. If the Eucharistic miracles like that are true, it would be very strong evidence for the existence of God (and moreover that He gives Catholics the thumbs-up). I'd love to see such a miracle happen in modern times, for the sake of putting it to scrutiny and proving such a thing. Until something as convincing as that happens, however, I'm afraid I'll remain a nonbeliever for the time.

Hmm. Having skimmed over that article the first time I missed the really interesting bit where it's still around. Again, I must admit that I have no answer for how it has been so well preserved. I am not exactly an authority on anything like this, though, so my inability to figure it out does not make me assume that it can't be something else I just don't know about. Rather than trying to find out if X or if Y is what kept it preserved, I'd simply be interested in hearing people just try to figure out an unbiased [i]what[/i] kept it so well preserved.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JustJ' post='1578228' date='Jun 20 2008, 11:36 PM']Check out string theory and quantum physics. There are likely a loooooot of parallel universes to ours that went completely different. Of course, the only ones that have any people to ask why things went perfectly for them were the lucky ones in the universes that went that way. Imagine you are a molecule of water in a puddle. You observe that the hole appears to perfectly fit our needs! What that molecule didn't notice was that the universe, the puddle here, is simply the way it is, and the only people around to ask any questions, thinking so vainly that they are the perfection that everything was created for, are unaware that they are the fluid figure that conforms to its surroundings, not needing the surroundings to be tailored perfectly to it.[/quote]
This parallel universe thing is *entirely* speculation. Maybe it's logical, but even you can't tell me that science proves that.
Now I've got nothing against believing that... The way I see it if we have a universe created by God, there could in theory be others. Why not?

...but really... let's not get into that.
Not one of us is a theoretical physicist, so really we're all just pretending.
Makes my brain want to explode, even though it's fascinating.

[Vincent Vega]

Thank you for your response. I appriciate that you were able to be so objective.
I would be interested to see another team of nonpartisan doctors examine it today, as medicine and technology has come quite a long way, even since the 80's. Nevertheless, it is still quite amazing that it's been preserved nearly perfectly for 1200 years, regardless of how or why, especially since it's not been in airtight or climate controlled conditions.

[Nihil Obstat]

Thought I'd comment on incorruptibility as well.
Some people say it's mostly random combinations of chemicals present in the atmosphere of that particular place, or the container, or something like that, or even that it was stored airtight.
We have examples of incorrupt saints though, and some of them have been checked over scientifically. Some of them I'm reasonably certain are unexplained.

[JustJ]

[quote name='Augustine of Hippo' post='1576814' date='Jun 19 2008, 10:25 PM']1) How did the material universe come into initial being?[/quote]
The most likely scenario I am aware of is that the universe has always existed in some form or another.
[quote name='Augustine of Hippo' post='1576814' date='Jun 19 2008, 10:25 PM']2) How did scientific random mutation overcome what have must have inevitable redundencies and errors that should occur in order to achieve working life systems?[/quote]
Short answer: On most planets, it didn't. We got lucky.

Long answer: As explained before, the very fact that we are here skews our view. We view that having life on a planet is unbelievably rare, ignoring the fact that if it were completely impossible, we wouldn't be here to argue about it.
[quote name='Augustine of Hippo' post='1576814' date='Jun 19 2008, 10:25 PM']3) What in a random universe accounts for such superfluous human notions such as intelligence, awareness, beauty, profundity, spirituality, etc...?[/quote]
First off, intelligence is hardly a human notion unless you mean to say the definition of intelligence as being something only humans have.

Now, I never said this was a random universe. It follows a lot of rules, as science has worked to put down and know in full. Unless you want to get into the quantum sense, we're not here randomly. It's where the flow of the universe according to the rules that govern our existence naturally pushed us to, like how a river flows downstream not randomly, but because that's where natural forces such as gravity push it.
[quote name='Augustine of Hippo' post='1576814' date='Jun 19 2008, 10:25 PM']4) Why does the human spirit seek God/religion when a relativistic viewpoint that requires only self interest would require far less effort in moral and material living?[/quote]
Only because god is an established concept that's still here after we already thought of better ways to explain life's mysteries.
[quote name='Augustine of Hippo' post='1576814' date='Jun 19 2008, 10:25 PM']5) Do good and evil exist, and if not how can society expect any individual to respect what could only be viewed as moral imposition and can any form of legislation be applicable and respectable if each person is only morally accountable to themselves[/quote]
Good and evil as objective forces do not exist. The interactions and motivations for various human endeavors are far, far more complex than that.

Morals, however, exist. They're hardwired into our brains through billions of years of evolutionary development as ways we should act for our own good, often syncing up with the good of the whole, but with many short-term judgments that can generally overpower our system of morals in special cases.
[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1577359' date='Jun 20 2008, 10:25 AM']I love my shoes.
On the topic of atheism though... I think (hope?) that miracle clinched it! [/quote]
Hardly. I just don't spend enough hours each day doing my healthy amount of forum posting.
[quote name='EricTheRed' post='1577685' date='Jun 20 2008, 03:40 PM']my question is... Do all dogs go to heaven?[/quote]
N/A, dogs don't have souls.
[quote name='Selah' post='1577754' date='Jun 20 2008, 05:05 PM']Do you believe in life after love?

(lol, couldn't resist )[/quote]
Yes.
[quote name='Galloglasses' post='1577795' date='Jun 20 2008, 06:02 PM']Or love after life?[/quote]
No.
[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1577869' date='Jun 20 2008, 07:02 PM']believes themself to be an exception[/quote]
I would apply for such a thing position, and could posit several scientists who share similar reasons that do not involve their feelings for any church.

To be honest, I attended church for a long time as an atheist (an evangelical one; I wouldn't insult my Catholic friends by taking Eucharist while not believing (the very thought made one of my very best friends cry before I assured her that I did no such thing)) just for its social functions, and I am quite impressed with their dedication to their communities in many small towns. These things, I am very supportive of, and only wish there could be secular events coming anywhere near these functions for doing good for communities. Then again, with a much smaller percentage of the population being nonbelievers than Christians, it's not surprising that the numbers make it difficult in the first place.

[Nihil Obstat]

I can tell that you're a different sort of atheist.
I'm sure you realize that you're fairly close to a theist already.
Sorry if that insults you.
I wans't trying to imply that you were one of those run of the mill atheists that I was complaining about.

[JustJ]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1578248' date='Jun 21 2008, 12:45 AM']This parallel universe thing is *entirely* speculation. Maybe it's logical, but even you can't tell me that science proves that.
Now I've got nothing against believing that... The way I see it if we have a universe created by God, there could in theory be others. Why not?

...but really... let's not get into that.
Not one of us is a theoretical physicist, so really we're all just pretending.
Makes my brain want to explode, even though it's fascinating.[/quote]
If I say that I'm no expert, I mean it. I do not seek to completely disprove you, only to answer your questions, and offer alternate theories for consideration if they are least somewhat credible.
[quote name='Galloglasses' post='1577888' date='Jun 20 2008, 07:33 PM']Its also funny when the ones come on saying that all Religions are the same at the Base level. This is a lie in the foremost sense and epitomises generalisation, for example, no matter how much you break down Taoism, Buddhism and Christianity down, Christianity will always be monothiestic and Believe in a One True God, while Taoism and Buddhism will always be Non-Thiestic and Believe in No God, (Contrary to popular idea, Buddhists don't worship Buddha, its something similar to how we venerate Saints, not worship them. Taoists are the same, but you can get a Taoist sect that does worship Tao as a god)

Also, for laughs, next time someone rails against you about the dark ages and religious wars causing the most deaths and torture, tell them compare the past 1900 years to the 20th century, the most secular in all of Human History and the most bloodiest and horrible. And that more Athiest leaders in that century have caused all this compared to two millenia of Religiously minded leaders.[/quote]
I would have far fewer problems nontheist religions if they did not contain other supernatural claims such as reincarnation or karma.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JustJ' post='1578266' date='Jun 20 2008, 11:53 PM']If I say that I'm no expert, I mean it. I do not seek to completely disprove you, only to answer your questions, and offer alternate theories for consideration if they are least somewhat credible.

I would have far fewer problems nontheist religions if they did not contain other supernatural claims such as reincarnation or karma.[/quote]

We don't like reincarnation or karma either.

[JustJ]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1578253' date='Jun 21 2008, 12:47 AM']Thought I'd comment on incorruptibility as well.
Some people say it's mostly random combinations of chemicals present in the atmosphere of that particular place, or the container, or something like that, or even that it was stored airtight.
We have examples of incorrupt saints though, and some of them have been checked over scientifically. Some of them I'm reasonably certain are unexplained.[/quote]
Forgive me if I'm wrong about this, but I do recall having heard examples of incorrupt bodies that weren't saints, not to mention the fact that there might actually be a lot more bodies with the potential for pulling off the same thing if they were buried under the same circumstances and at some point exhumed to have a peek at them, though I must admit, this would be a bit rude, to say the least.
[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1578265' date='Jun 21 2008, 12:52 AM']I wans't trying to imply that you were one of those run of the mill atheists that I was complaining about.[/quote]
No, I could tell that, and thanked you for being able to distinguish between the two. There are many theists who do not know the difference between atheists and devil worshipers (and in recent times in the American South, Muslims. Seriously. ;_.

And don't worry. I'm not one to get offended unless it's by blinding ignorance. I haven't seen very much of that in this thread, at least.

[JustJ]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1578270' date='Jun 21 2008, 12:54 AM']We don't like reincarnation or karma either. [/quote]
I'm sure you realize that you're [edit: well, a bit closer than some] to a skeptic already.
Sorry if that insults you.

Edited June 21, 2008 by JustJ

[lilac_angel]

What about the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, witnessed by 70,000 people, reported in previously disbelieving secular newspapers and also witnessed by people miles away from the actual appariton site? And I would find mass hysteria to be a lacking explanation there.

And that's only one of many apparitions that have yet to be disproven; if anything, science hasn't been able to do that for any of the church approved apparitions, despite its attempts.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JustJ' post='1578275' date='Jun 20 2008, 11:58 PM']Forgive me if I'm wrong about this, but I do recall having heard examples of incorrupt bodies that weren't saints, not to mention the fact that there might actually be a lot more bodies with the potential for pulling off the same thing if they were buried under the same circumstances and at some point exhumed to have a peek at them, though I must admit, this would be a bit rude, to say the least.

No, I could tell that, and thanked you for being able to distinguish between the two. There are many theists who do not know the difference between atheists and devil worshipers (and in recent times in the American South, Muslims. Seriously. ;_.

And don't worry. I'm not one to get offended unless it's by blinding ignorance. I haven't seen very much of that in this thread, at least. [/quote]

Seems to me in these three days that this forum is full of very knowledgable people.
From hearing about incorrupt bodies, it seems like the authorities are very careful to try to find chemical evidence... like the bog people as an extreme example.
Obviously there is the one pope (John XXIII?) who was sealed in an airtight coffin, and he hasn't decomposed, but there are others who were routinely exhumed in investigation of sainthood, which should have under normal circumstances decayed.
I'm not going to say that it's impossible that it was natural though. I don't know enough either.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='lilac_angel' post='1578279' date='Jun 21 2008, 12:00 AM']What about the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, witnessed by 70,000 people, reported in previously disbelieving secular newspapers and also witnessed by people miles away from the actual appariton site? And I would find mass hysteria to be a lacking explanation there.

And that's only one of many apparitions that have yet to be disproven; if anything, science hasn't been able to do that for any of the church approved apparitions, despite its attempts.[/quote]

Ooh, good one. My mom and I were talking about this today.

[lilac_angel]

[quote name='JustJ' post='1578275' date='Jun 20 2008, 11:58 PM']Forgive me if I'm wrong about this, but I do recall having heard examples of incorrupt bodies that weren't saints, not to mention the fact that there might actually be a lot more bodies with the potential for pulling off the same thing if they were buried under the same circumstances and at some point exhumed to have a peek at them, though I must admit, this would be a bit rude, to say the least.[/quote]


I think you might be wrong, at least in part -- those examples may not all have been officially Church-recognized saints, but I heard that they were all discovered to have been Catholics, and to my knowledge, there is no record of people of other faiths or non-faiths being found incorrupt.

All of the circumstances in which the incorruptibles were buried were different, and some of the burial conditions were actually quite antagonistic to preservation. I know this from just a basic skim of the beginning of my Incorruptibles book.

Edited June 21, 2008 by lilac_angel