if a god does exist it wouldnt fit any description within any current or previous religions.

i dont believe in god but most importantly i refuse to buy into any religion. a god could exist but it wouldnt fit our current understandings of what that might imply.

The critiques of religion socialism brings are valid. Structured religion is rotten. But, I find the teachings usually beautiful, especially in the Quran which I've been studying recently.

I think to be a firm atheist is ugly, not agnosticism

Dude really just made a thread to show off he's above all atheists

Bro atheists dont give af bout a god, thats the point. U dont wanna understand atheism lol

i’m on the choose a side already agnosticism is ugly side, nothing more annoying then someone who sits on the fence.

But communist also attacked God in the philosophical field as well like with Lenin and Engel who well would s*** on agnostic philosophers who’s philosophies logical conclusion ended up in some concept of God, what do you think about in that sense ?

This. A rejection of metaphysics would be pure atheism. Then again, how could one believe in concepts such as Quantum Mechanics without understand a spiritual aspect of it?

Quantum Mechanics explain the spiritual realms. Even the shapes ie Tesseracts have so many levels to it, it's rather interesting to deny or ignore various levels of understanding

I'll need to read up on that to have a solid opinion

The Bible does state that God doesn't dwell in temples made by men. You're right about that, religions aren't truly the way. It's more important about receiving His word (Bible) in a direct to consumer than having a middle man (or woman)

There are 2 types of people: Those who stand in a field of fruits and veggies and begin to pick and eat. Those who have others parce the produce for them. They're both standing in the same field, just two different thought processes.

science cannot explain what happens after the body dies, and I have the vague impression that ancient civilizations had some ideas that all of them agreed upon the same

most contemporary scientists and neo-atheists believe science disprove god and that science tells us about the objective “real world” out there

anything that doesn’t fall under science’s grand eye is cast aside and relegated to something with no validity

yeah, no one in here said this

the “infinite universe” posited by dogmatist Stephen hawking is an incoherent, irrational concept because potentiality has to be actualized

not only are the chances embarrassingly slim for our particular planet, galaxy, solar system etc. to be formed randomly out of entropy in an infinite universe, it isn’t even possible because everything is caused or set into motion by literally something

uh, no, atheists are the ones that tend to get on this weird pedestal and preen themselves as “more rational” and better than theists, when they haven’t even actually understood the opposite position whatsoever

As a redditor…

the particular problem that neo-atheists, and pretty much a lot of western society has in general nowadays is that they take scientific objectivism + materialism borderline (if not) presumptively simply from birth, lots of people think science is the only way to gain actual knowledge about the world and any other way is useless and/or not important

this is where you get people such as Dawkins saying that science has disproved the existence of god, or Hawking saying “Philosophy is dead” people have simply replaced God with science as like this weird grand objective arbiter of reality when all science does is tell us about the external world about us as it appears to our senses (alà Kant, idealism) it does not give you complete actual knowledge about anything “out there”

it is a limited discipline just like anything else is, but for some reason when you say this niggas will throw a tantrum. Thomas Nagel penned an entire book critiquing science’s method of inquiry and evolution and they absolutely tore him apart (and he noted within the book that he’s a staunch, committed atheist, and all that he’s seeking is a more complete, fairer understanding of the world around us) today’s science is not too dissimilar to a religious institution whatsoever looking at it from a scientistic standpoint at all.

ay man i seen u post this somewhere else as well do u just have this s*** on copy paste?

The burden of consciousness makes us think we are far more significant than we really are. The universe is very vast, very old, and filled with things we can’t wrap our heads around yet

Theism is the mental solace to rationalize and accept this self importance

Atheism rejects all this and seeks to build entirely from a material framework

and the other thing (lol sorry for the rant) is that the real difference i see between Eastern philosophy and Western philosophy is that Eastern philosophy has an emphasis on mysticism, in addition to a very rich philosophical undertone in their religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism)

you are not going to find God through science (or else like ya know it wouldn’t be God… God is supposed to be a transcendent preternatural being of sorts) you have to engage in certain practices and/or rituals to help you come to that understanding of the divine.

that’s why there is a heavy emphasis on meditation in both Buddhism and Hinduism, psychedelics can kind of give you a glimpse of what the great ancient sages and mystics were speaking of as well, communion with Christianity, baptism, yoga etc

it isn’t strictly logic that is supposed to give you a belief in God, logic is just supposed to assist you with the understanding your experiences

some people think they experience the divine and come to a belief in God, others might have a divine experience and dismiss it as placebo or rationalize it away, and others think any practice dealing with religion itself etc is cult-y or dogmatic, so they don’t even bother trying it, or they’re conditioned to dismiss anything that could even be considered mystical in the first place

it’s said that every human has the ability to experience the divine, but some have trained it out of their systems

Believe in God and read your Bible, fam

i honestly might as well make it a pasta at this point since i have to assert the same points around the same tired arguments over and over again

consciousness has nothing to do with theism, that’s number one

number two, to distill theism as “mental solace” is blatant arrogance, what solace is there in a deistic god that simply sets the universe and all into motion and doesn’t interact with it further?

the big bang didnt happen by coincidence theres a very detailed scientific process behind the big bang lmao

said it less obnoxiously than i could have

@op this is as good as it's going to get

the concept of god is one made by man and practiced only by man whereas evolutionary science provides very detailed explanations of why the universe is the way it is

does it describe everything? no, because humans do not and cannot know everything about the universe. however its a lot more believeable than a f***ing deity lmao

science is made by man and also practiced by man… it again, is not a universal indicator of what knowledge is

evolutionary science doesnt explain anything about the universe dude it just literally discusses what is there, it doesn’t engage in any of the why or the dirtier details

Jesus is King