Can former atheists explain what atheism is?

[billvon]

So you won’t answer if?

Let's see if you can answer your own question.

As a theist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make a theist, for whom God is magic, understand there is no God, while your in your theist state?

 

[Goldtop]

What or who, do I need to defence against?

No one said anything about defending "against", it's all about defending your words, which at this time, are rather meaningless when it comes to your knowledge of God. Put something with some meat on the bone that people can understand.

So you won’t answer if?
That’s what I thought.

Of course, honest people don't answer dishonest questions. Reword it to be honest and I will. If you can't word your questions to be honest, then what is the point of asking? You can't just stick the answer you want to hear in my mouth and hope it comes right back out. Doesn't work that way. You either have to take what others say on the merit of their words or you're just running a monologue and are not listening to others.

 

[Goldtop]

Potential = That which may become reality.

Sorry, but I was always thought "Potential" That which may become Kinetic.

 

[Write4U]

Sorry, but I was always thought "Potential" That which may become Kinetic.

That too.....
Although strictly speaking--

In science, however, the adjective has a special meaning: Potential energy is the kind of stored energy that a boulder sitting at the top of a cliff has (the opposite of kinetic energy, which is what it has as it rolls down that cliff). https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/potential

po·ten·tial
adjective; having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.

"a two-pronged campaign to woo potential customers" .

Synonyms; possibilities, potentiality, prospect; More

Noun;
latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

1. "a young broadcaster with great potential"

Physics;
the quantity determining the energy of mass in a gravitational field or of charge in an electric field.

Like physical patterns, potential exists everywhere you look, but it may not be readily detectable. However all Reality is preceded by potential (Bohm's Implicate)

Potential existed before the BB , else the BB could not have happened!

Consider that as a viable scientific alternative to a world ruled by God(s)?

 

[Jan Ardena]

As a theist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make a theist, for whom God is magic, understand there is no God, while your in your theist state?

You think God is magic?
It’s a start!

There is no “understanding there is no God”, only the subconscious affirmation. So I would make stuff up, or accept anything that denies and rejects God.

Jan.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Has science answered, we know how life began, or to they beleive they think they have the answer?

"Abiogenesis is the boundary between chemistry and biology."

 

[billvon]

As a theist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make a theist, for whom God is magic, understand there is no God, while your in your theist state?

You think God is magic? . . .There is no “understanding there is no God”

So you can't answer your own question when it is rephrased to ask about theism - yet you demand others answer it and mock them when they say it is loaded.

You are a perfect example of a religious hypocrite. Thank you for regularly providing such examples.

 

[Write4U]

"Abiogenesis is the boundary between chemistry and biology."

Life began as single cells able to divide and duplicate (mitosis). This action is achieved by "quorum sensing" of chemical signals from smaller bio-chemicals, which can signal each other when "time is right" and the living process of cell division (duplication) takes place. This is not

The phenomonon of dynamic numerical growth is caused by ability to duplicate in all biological organisms, affording an increased chance of survival.

Cluster of cells of Halobacterium sp. strain NRC-1
NASA - en:Image: Halobacteria.jpg

Archaea, prokaroytic microbes, were first found in extreme environments, such as hydrothermal vents.

There are several possible highly dynamic bio-chemical environments which may have given rise to self-assembling bio-organisms which learned to divide.


Mycoplasma

Mycoplasma genitalium

. Mycoplasma genitalium, a parasitic bacterium which lives in the primate bladder, waste disposal organs, genital, and respiratory tracts, is thought to be the smallest known organism capable of independent growth and reproduction.

Smallest organisms - Wikipedia

And the smallest may well be:

Mollicutes: Current Biology - Cell Press

What are they? Mollicutes — Spiroplasma, Mycoplasma and Acholeplasma — are the smallest and simplest known free-living and self-replicating forms of life.

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(05)00684-6

If you go any smaller than that you have pure bio-chemicals.
However, bio-chemicals do dynamically interact and engage in "quorum sensing" which is the sharing of information at chemical levels.

 

[Write4U]

duplicate

 

[Jan Ardena]

So you can't answer your own question when it is rephrased to ask about theism - yet you demand others answer it and mock them when they say it is loaded.

I did answer it, which is what Goldtop, failed to do, despite the fact that it is for Goldtop to answer it, not me.
Can you answer it, or are you going to run as well?

You are a perfect example of a religious hypocrite. Thank you for regularly providing such examples.

You’re a perfect example of an angry atheist, and we all know angry people are irrational, meaning they say things that are born out of anger, not intelligence.

Do you think you could curtail anger for a minute and answer the question?

Jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

That too.....
Although strictly speaking--


Like physical patterns, potential exists everywhere you look, but it may not be readily detectable. However all Reality is preceded by potential (Bohm's Implicate)

Potential existed before the BB , else the BB could not have happened!

Consider that as a viable scientific alternative to a world ruled by God(s)?

That too.....
Although strictly speaking--


Like physical patterns, potential exists everywhere you look, but it may not be readily detectable. However all Reality is preceded by potential (Bohm's Implicate)

Potential existed before the BB , else the BB could not have happened!

Consider that as a viable scientific alternative to a world ruled by God(s)?

Hey! Can you start your own thread with this topic. Thanks

Jan.

 

[billvon]

I did answer it, which is what Goldtop, failed to do

No, you didn't. But I will give you a second chance.

As a theist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make a theist, for whom God is magic, understand there is no God, while your in your theist state?

So the answer must contain the evidence that will make you understand that there is no God. If there is no evidence that you will ever accept because you are blind to it by your belief, then just say so.

Can you answer it, or are you going to run as well?

Nope. If there was repeatable, verifiable evidence I would believe it. For example - a priest who prays for God to topple a mountain, and the mountain is toppled supernaturally, while a priest from an "untrue" religion fails at the same task. If he could do that - and repeat it a few times - that would be very strong evidence.

Now, can you do the same? Let's say every priest, cardinal, believer etc of your religion prays and prays to topple that mountain and it never happens. Would your belief in God change at all? Or is it not a fact based thing with you?

You’re a perfect example of an angry atheist, and we all know angry people are irrational, meaning they say things that are born out of anger, not intelligence. Do you think you could curtail anger for a minute and answer the question?

It's hilarious that you say that while refusing to answer the question. You are a perfect hypocrite.

 

[origin]

Jan, you asked what atheism is and then in the op you asked why is someone an atheist. I think the what is easy - it is not believing in God. The why is more difficult.
God can be many things from a personal deity that is involved in every aspect of your life to a sort of hands off, big picture guy that sets the rules for the universe and then lets things carry on.

As a young person I was a theist. As I got older I just sort of lost interest and didn't think about it much. I have thought a lot about it over the last 20 years or so. In general as far as the personal God guiding, protecting or listening to you that seems totally out of the question based on the arbitrary tragedies that occur daily. The tragedies that hit people are completely random. The random nature of these bad things that happen to good people (or good things that happen to bad people) lead me to believe there is no guiding force to the world. The seemingly random nature of tragedies is addressed by the theist with sayings such as 'it is all part of God's plan" or "we cannot understand what God does". I simply do not have faith that seemingly random tragedies are anything other than random tragedies.

As far as a 'hands off' God, I simply do not see any evidence that one exists.

I guess I believe that we live in an unfeeling universe. The universe does not care about us. The universe is not bad nor is it good, it just is. There is no savior coming rescue us from ourselves. There is no God that is going to protect us from ourselves. It is all up to us, we are on our own.

 

[Write4U]

Hey! Can you start your own thread with this topic. Thanks

Jan.

No Jan, I am on topic.
Just because you don't like it, you think I'll sit idly by while you spout your nonsense?

I am the atheist explaining to you what atheism is. You asked the question I gave you the answer. I am explaining to you what phenomenon caused "let there be light", an inescapable prior potential.

Do you feel qualified to tell me I am not a "good" atheist?

p.s. can you explain what it means to be a "former atheist"? Usually its the other way around.

 

[Jan Ardena]

If there was repeatable, verifiable evidence I would believe it. For example - a priest who prays for God to topple a mountain, and the mountain is toppled supernaturally, while a priest from an "untrue" religion fails at the same task. If he could do that - and repeat it a few times - that would be very strong evidence.

How would you know that event occurred supernaturally?

Now, can you do the same? Let's say every priest, cardinal, believer etc of your religion prays and prays to topple that mountain and it never happens. Would your belief in God change at all? Or is it not a fact based thing with you?

No it wouldn’t.

Can you explain why you would regard the good priest praying to God for, and the mountain toppling, a “fact” that there is a God.

Jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Do you feel qualified to tell me I am not a "good" atheist?

There is no such position as a “good atheist”, or a bad atheist, only “atheist”.

Yes I am qualified to say whether or not, you are an atheist.

p.s. can you explain what it means to be a "former atheist"? Usually its the other way around.

A former atheist is a person who at one time did not believe in God (for whatever reason), but came to the realisation that he was fooling himself.

The point of this thread is for those formermer atheist to explain what was going on at the time of their unawareness of God.

Jan.

 

[Goldtop]

I did answer it, which is what Goldtop, failed to do, despite the fact that it is for Goldtop to answer it, not me.
Can you answer it, or are you going to run as well?

If I was running away, I wouldn't have asked you to reword your question so that it was honest, all you're doing is demonstrating you have no intention of being honest. Reword the question so its not loaded, Jan. Or, is a dishonest "monologue" all you can provide? I'll take your silence as a, Yes.

 

[Goldtop]

As an atheist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make an atheist, for whom there is no s no God, understand there is a God, while your in their atheist state?

Let's have a look at your question, Jan. Here is what it would look like if it weren't loaded and was honest...

" what would you regard as evidence enough, to understand there is a God?"

See how easy that was, Jan? Now, is this the question you were going to ask or would you prefer to stick with the original?

 

[billvon]

How would you know that event occurred supernaturally?

If there was evidence it could not have happened naturally. Say, the bottom third of the mountain just disappeared.

No it wouldn’t.

OK. So there is no level of fact that can convince you of something. Thank you for admitting that.

Can you explain why you would regard the good priest praying to God for, and the mountain toppling, a “fact” that there is a God.

Scientific method. Come up with a hypothesis, run an experiment, observe the results. If it looks good, repeat the experiment. When you are done, analyze the results.

 

[Jan Ardena]

If there was evidence it could not have happened naturally. Say, the bottom third of the mountain just disappeared.

So now you change a toppling mountain to a floating mountain peak? H

OK. So there is no level of fact that can convince you of something. Thank you for admitting that.

Give me a fact, or something to work with.

Scientific method. Come up with a hypothesis, run an experiment, observe the results. If it looks good, repeat the experiment. When you are done, analyze the results.

Why would you think it was a fact of God, in the first place? That’s what’s important?

Jan.