Question for atheists RE: 9/11

[Anonymous]

So if we disagree we are ranting. Cute.

If there is a deity of any sort, it should be ashamed of it's/themselves for allowing this nonsense. Assuming we are like infants to it, one doesn't give the babies explosives and matches to figure out how to light candles.

Otherwise, we are random chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anyone who had the misfortune of responding to the "Why Don't You Believe In God?" thread is familiar with the parade of egocentrism masquerading as religiosity this thread is trending towards.

Please, ditch the thesaurus. And do us a favor and ditch this thread so the adults can have a conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if we disagree we are ranting. Cute.

If there is a deity of any sort, it should be ashamed of it's/themselves for allowing this nonsense. Assuming we are like infants to it, one doesn't give the babies explosives and matches to figure out how to light candles.

Otherwise, we are random chance.

Guess there's no mileage in trying to explain complex concepts/theories like "free will" and "clockmaker" to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's funny, I stopped responding to the old "Why Don't You Believe in God?" thread because I realized that OP wasn't engaging in the dialogue in good faith, and that I was merely an unwitting supernumerary to an exercise in self-indulgence. Both threads are eerily similar in the sense that they seem to exist for the dual purposes of providing a platform for prosthelytizing and the heady rush that comes from painting oneself as a persecuted religious believer.

Life is too precious and fleeting to me to indulge OP.

In any case, these two videos sum up my thoughts on the various issues at hand:

PP: I'm going to take my toys and leave!

Your response is just weird. Where do you see people "not engaging in good faith" (did you intend that pun)? Because I see lots of very personal stories here. Where do you see "self-indulgence," unless you define it as people relating these stories? I see as much "proseletyzing" by atheists as by believers -- In fact, I can show you quotes in this thread about "fairy tales" and "pleasant-sounding myths" (posted by you and not by the other atheists here, I'm going to guess). And where has anybody "painted herself as a persecuted religious believer" -- show me a single quote, please!

Nobody took your bait so far, and good for them. Because I can see what's coming, I'll say right here: asking you to document your rant is very different from taking your bait by responding to the so-called points of your rant.

Go away, Ranting Atheist. I'm just here to say that you're destroying a relatively (for this issue) constructive conversation about religion -- and cats -- between the other atheists and believers. FWIW, other atheists have asked you to leave before, too.

Anyone who had the misfortune of responding to the "Why Don't You Believe In God?" thread is familiar with the parade of egocentrism masquerading as religiosity this thread is trending towards.

I'm not seeing a lot of egocentrism here. Actually I think the most self-indulgent post I have seen so far is from the PP who posted 2 videos making fun of people in this thread. Picking a fight for no apparent reason and making fun of people who are not interested in watching your irrelevant videos is extremely self-indulgent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if we disagree we are ranting. Cute.

If there is a deity of any sort, it should be ashamed of it's/themselves for allowing this nonsense. Assuming we are like infants to it, one doesn't give the babies explosives and matches to figure out how to light candles.

Otherwise, we are random chance.

The name "Ranting Atheist" was actually first applied to a poster -- you? -- by another atheist, a few months ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if we disagree we are ranting. Cute.

If there is a deity of any sort, it should be ashamed of it's/themselves for allowing this nonsense. Assuming we are like infants to it, one doesn't give the babies explosives and matches to figure out how to light candles.

Otherwise, we are random chance.

Guess there's no mileage in trying to explain complex concepts/theories like "free will" and "clockmaker" to you.

Clockmaker? Haven't you noticed that the people who have the best understanding of the clock (physicists, biologists) seem to have the least interest in God, and the people who make a study of free will (philosophers and theologians) are split down the middle?

[Anonymous]

This thread, and the others like it, makes me wonder why atheism is so hard for believers to comprehend. I can understand why someone would believe in god/gods, even if it's not a belief I hold. Are you really confused by it or is there a motive here I'm missing? This is an honest question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread, and the others like it, makes me wonder why atheism is so hard for believers to comprehend. I can understand why someone would believe in god/gods, even if it's not a belief I hold. Are you really confused by it or is there a motive here I'm missing? This is an honest question.

It's funny, because many view atheism as a "belief" itself. That is, atheists can't prove God doesn't exist. Dawkins among others say they are agnostic, not atheist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread, and the others like it, makes me wonder why atheism is so hard for believers to comprehend. I can understand why someone would believe in god/gods, even if it's not a belief I hold. Are you really confused by it or is there a motive here I'm missing? This is an honest question.

This is the OP. I was asking an honest question. The context of the services for 9/11 made we wonder how atheists would speak words of comfort, when their beliefs contradicted the words of comfort that were being offered by the speakers that day. In their view, as several have stated here, there is no hope in eternity, no trust in perfect justice, no redemption in suffering, no virtue in laying down one's life for one's neighbor, no reason that one worldview should be seen as objectively better than another (terrorists versus Western freedom). Humans are ultimately cosmic dust, like the planes that went into the buildings. No difference on the fundamental level of matter and energy, as the quantum physics atheist said.

I appreciated the thoughtful replies, but my confusion remains right now. What would be an example of an atheist speech of comfort and consolation in the midst of such evil and loss--if the "evil" is just a point of view and the loss is not so great (humans=cats=matter+energy) and also permanent (no eternity)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread, and the others like it, makes me wonder why atheism is so hard for believers to comprehend. I can understand why someone would believe in god/gods, even if it's not a belief I hold. Are you really confused by it or is there a motive here I'm missing? This is an honest question.

This is the OP. I was asking an honest question. The context of the services for 9/11 made we wonder how atheists would speak words of comfort, when their beliefs contradicted the words of comfort that were being offered by the speakers that day. In their view, as several have stated here, there is no hope in eternity, no trust in perfect justice, no redemption in suffering, no virtue in laying down one's life for one's neighbor, no reason that one worldview should be seen as objectively better than another (terrorists versus Western freedom). Humans are ultimately cosmic dust, like the planes that went into the buildings. No difference on the fundamental level of matter and energy, as the quantum physics atheist said.

I appreciated the thoughtful replies, but my confusion remains right now. What would be an example of an atheist speech of comfort and consolation in the midst of such evil and loss--if the "evil" is just a point of view and the loss is not so great (humans=cats=matter+energy) and also permanent (no eternity)?

I really think you are misunderstanding atheists here. A lot of atheists in this thread have supported your misconceptions but atheism is not a belief system in and of itself. It only means that you don't believe in a god. It certainly doesn't mean that you are morally bankrupt. An atheist is not necessarily someone who has no spirituality either. I don't want to go into my particular spiritual/moral belief system here but please understand that atheists are all different and while some might believe that we only rot and turn into dust when we die, others might have completely different concepts of death and the soul. As an atheist (who claims to be agnostic but who really is incapable of entertaining the idea of a supreme being in any form), I definitely don't see virtue in suffering but I certainly see virtue in saving a life, being kind, loving one another, etc. It's just that virtuous acts are done without any kind of reward or punishment in mind. You do them because you believe that they are right and good and that's enough for me. I do think that you are asking a sincere question and that you sincerely misunderstand what being a non-religious person is all about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I appreciated the thoughtful replies, but my confusion remains right now. What would be an example of an atheist speech of comfort and consolation in the midst of such evil and loss--if the "evil" is just a point of view and the loss is not so great (humans=cats=matter+energy) and also permanent (no eternity)?

I'm a Christian, not an atheist, but even as an outsider it's pretty easy to think of comforting words. If I were giving a sermon, I'd say:

Your loved one(s) is(/are) gone now, and the grief seems unbearable. When it hurts the most, remember what it was that made you love them so much. Remember their faces, their voices, the things that made them different from any other human who has ever lived, or ever will live. Remembering like this will make the pain worse at first, but it will ultimately strengthen you. They are gone, but your love for them can abide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread, and the others like it, makes me wonder why atheism is so hard for believers to comprehend. I can understand why someone would believe in god/gods, even if it's not a belief I hold. Are you really confused by it or is there a motive here I'm missing? This is an honest question.

It's funny, because many view atheism as a "belief" itself. That is, atheists can't prove God doesn't exist. Dawkins among others say they are agnostic, not atheist.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread, and the others like it, makes me wonder why atheism is so hard for believers to comprehend. I can understand why someone would believe in god/gods, even if it's not a belief I hold. Are you really confused by it or is there a motive here I'm missing? This is an honest question.

It's funny, because many view atheism as a "belief" itself. That is, atheists can't prove God doesn't exist. Dawkins among others say they are agnostic, not atheist.

Atheism means the lack of belief in deities. And I would agree that just about everyone is agnostic, whether they realize it or not.

It's impossible to disprove a negative claim. Positive claims can be proven or disproven but only if there is evidence/proof to begin with. When it comes to gods or religions - there is no evidence or proof, just belief, opinions, feelings, and claims.

[Anonymous]

A lot of people lost their loved ones. The loss was indeed great. Like a lot of other people, I find comfort in remembering those who have died. I don't think I'll see them again, but I did love them while they were here and they impacted my life in a big way. I have empathy for those who lost people on 9/11 and would probably focus a speech on remembering and honoring them.

I would not refer to any evil or retribution because I think that is morally objectionable and takes away from the ones who died. I couldn't listen to Biden's speech because I found it upsetting. But, I realize he was talking to an audience that was primarily military/military families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread, and the others like it, makes me wonder why atheism is so hard for believers to comprehend. I can understand why someone would believe in god/gods, even if it's not a belief I hold. Are you really confused by it or is there a motive here I'm missing? This is an honest question.

It's funny, because many view atheism as a "belief" itself. That is, atheists can't prove God doesn't exist. Dawkins among others say they are agnostic, not atheist.

True, which is why theists are so wedded to the term "atheist". It's an attempt at creating a parallelism that doesn't exist. We're non-theists. Gods and unicorns are irrelevant.