What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-01-2014, 11:46 AM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 09:50 AM)docskeptic Wrote:  
(30-01-2014 09:40 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  What evidence would an atheist require to believe in the existence of a non-interventionist creator (or alternatively, a creator who didn't want to spoon-feed the world the answer to the question of his existence)?

Looking,
Your revised question is moot. Why would I want to even begin looking for evidence for a non-interventionist creator since it will make not the slightest difference to it or to me what I decide? I could safely ignore it. Only an interventionist deity is worth looking for or worshiping.

I like your last reply. Keep that mind open. Some bad stuff may fall out and some good stuff may fall in!

Doc

Maybe I should clarify when I say non-interventionist. What I really mean is a deity who doesn't micromanage reality (ie. doesn't set bushes on fire, heal the sick, etc). Obviously, a creator would have had to "intervene" at one point...when he created the universe. Even if that is the extent of his involvement, I don't think it takes too much to understand why people would look for a creator. If you were told that you were adopted and that your real dad was out there somewhere, would you be curious about who your bio-dad is or what he is like?

The idea of a non-interventionist creator is one who set initial conditions and kick started the universe. Just because he doesn't intervene in what we choose to do with his creation on a day-to-day basis, doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't care about humankind (he did go to the trouble of creating us, afterall, or at least setting initial conditions that would inevitably lead to our creation), and I disagree that knowledge of such a being is irrelevant.

First, it gives us a basis for objective moral values, which atheism does not.

Second, it also opens up questions of an afterlife. If it is possible for something to exist in a non-corporeal form outside of our known universe (as any creator would have had to if he created the universe) then an afterlife is also possible. If we have a non-corporeal aspect to us (a spirit, soul, etc) then it could (or would) theoretically result in us carrying on with life after death. Combined with the ideas of objective moral values, even a non-interventionist creator, may judge our souls after death (this may not mean that bad people go to hell, per se, but maybe he sends moral people to one dimension and immoral people to another, or has a multitude of worlds where he sends people of similar moral character...so, if you live your life as an asshold you might end up in the equivalent of hell because you would have to spend eternity with a bunch of other assholes, lol).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 11:49 AM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 11:46 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  
(30-01-2014 09:50 AM)docskeptic Wrote:  Looking,
Your revised question is moot. Why would I want to even begin looking for evidence for a non-interventionist creator since it will make not the slightest difference to it or to me what I decide? I could safely ignore it. Only an interventionist deity is worth looking for or worshiping.

I like your last reply. Keep that mind open. Some bad stuff may fall out and some good stuff may fall in!

Doc

Maybe I should clarify when I say non-interventionist. What I really mean is a deity who doesn't micromanage reality (ie. doesn't set bushes on fire, heal the sick, etc). Obviously, a creator would have had to "intervene" at one point...when he created the universe. Even if that is the extent of his involvement, I don't think it takes too much to understand why people would look for a creator. If you were told that you were adopted and that your real dad was out there somewhere, would you be curious about who your bio-dad is or what he is like?

The idea of a non-interventionist creator is one who set initial conditions and kick started the universe. Just because he doesn't intervene in what we choose to do with his creation on a day-to-day basis, doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't care about humankind (he did go to the trouble of creating us, afterall, or at least setting initial conditions that would inevitably lead to our creation), and I disagree that knowledge of such a being is irrelevant.

First, it gives us a basis for objective moral values, which atheism does not.

Second, it also opens up questions of an afterlife. If it is possible for something to exist in a non-corporeal form outside of our known universe (as any creator would have had to if he created the universe) then an afterlife is also possible. If we have a non-corporeal aspect to us (a spirit, soul, etc) then it could (or would) theoretically result in us carrying on with life after death. Combined with the ideas of objective moral values, even a non-interventionist creator, may judge our souls after death (this may not mean that bad people go to hell, per se, but maybe he sends moral people to one dimension and immoral people to another, or has a multitude of worlds where he sends people of similar moral character...so, if you live your life as an asshold you might end up in the equivalent of hell because you would have to spend eternity with a bunch of other assholes, lol).

Yeah, you got too much woo in your stew, dude. Dodgy

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like houseofcantor's post
30-01-2014, 01:28 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 11:46 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  First, it gives us a basis for objective moral values, which atheism does not.

I think not. How does it? We don't have any way of knowing what those values might be.

Quote:Second, it also opens up questions of an afterlife.

Not really any more than no creator does. Either requires dualism, and there is no evidence for dualism and a great deal of evidence against it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Chas's post
30-01-2014, 01:41 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
Who says there's any such thing as objective moral values?

There is such a thing as accepted moral values. But objective?

The idea of "objective moral values" is an apologetic construction designed to buttress the argument for God. We recognize there is no such thing as "objective moral values," especially when tied to a God, when we observe that no God (or god) holds values that we today accept as moral. Not the gods of Greece. They're a mess. Egypt? Please. Islam? Values, yes. Moral, no. Christianity and Judaism? Are you out of your bleeping mind? Yahweh is a moral monster.

The notion that "God" gives us a basis for objective moral values presumes the existence of objective moral values. Moral values are not objective. They are developed and passed on from one generation to the next. They rely on man to make observations and draw conclusions.

If the existence of God gives us a basis for objective moral values, then I demand to know where this list of objective moral values is located and where it is connected by evidence to any God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like TwoCultSurvivor's post
30-01-2014, 01:46 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 11:46 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  First, it gives us a basis for objective moral values, which atheism does not.

While it might do so, that isn't necessarily a good thing. Atheism does just fine in the moral department, and objective morality is only as good as what it tells you to do.

How "good" is an objective moral system that commands you to not use God's name like a swear word because it hurts God's feelings, but makes no command against rape?


(30-01-2014 11:46 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  Second, it also opens up questions of an afterlife.

That might not be a good thing. Given that your average Christian believes that you get into heaven by accepting Jesus as your lord and savior (John 3:16 and what not), and that only 35% of the world's population is Christian, two-thirds of all people get a bad afterlife. That's assuming merely identifying as Christian is good enough to make the cut.


(30-01-2014 11:46 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  If it is possible for something to exist in a non-corporeal form outside of our known universe (as any creator would have had to if he created the universe) then an afterlife is also possible. If we have a non-corporeal aspect to us (a spirit, soul, etc) then it could (or would) theoretically result in us carrying on with life after death. Combined with the ideas of objective moral values, even a non-interventionist creator, may judge our souls after death (this may not mean that bad people go to hell, per se, but maybe he sends moral people to one dimension and immoral people to another, or has a multitude of worlds where he sends people of similar moral character...so, if you live your life as an asshold you might end up in the equivalent of hell because you would have to spend eternity with a bunch of other assholes, lol).

It also apparently opens the door to making up lots of stuff via wishful thinking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
30-01-2014, 02:03 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 11:46 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  Obviously, a creator would have had to "intervene" at one point.
Why are you making assumptions? you hold no special knowledge in the whole planet to make that assumption.

So let's just go back to "Does God exist" premise shall we? cus' its pointless going around your cycle of assumptions!
Quote:The idea of a non-interventionist creator is one who set initial conditions and kick started the universe.
Basically what you're proposing is a deistic creator?
Quote:(he did go to the trouble of creating us, afterall
He sure did.. [Image: unintelligent.jpg]
Quote:First, it gives us a basis for objective moral values, which atheism does not.
You're implying that objective morality is anything good? ha ha yeah be ready to justify horrible crimes because of your "Objective" morality.
Quote:Second, it also opens up questions of an afterlife.
We all know there's no evidence for that.
Quote:(as any creator would have had to if he created the universe)
Making more assumptions are we?Rolleyes
Quote:then an afterlife is also possible.
And more...
Quote:If we have a non-corporeal aspect to us (a spirit, soul, etc)
WISHFUL THINKING that's what i call this buddy.
Quote:Combined with the ideas of objective moral values, even a non-interventionist creator, may judge our souls after death(this may not mean that bad people go to hell, per se, but maybe he sends moral people to one dimension and immoral people to another, or has a multitude of worlds where he sends people of similar moral character...so, if you live your life as an asshold you might end up in the equivalent of hell because you would have to spend eternity with a bunch of other assholes, lol).
Wait.. did i miss the part where you said something about substantiating your claims?

Dreams/Hallucinations/delusions are not evidence
Wishful thinking is not evidence
Disproved statements&Illogical conclusions are not evidence
Logical fallacies&Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence
Vague prophecies is not evidence
Data that requires a certain belief is not evidence
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like IndianAtheist's post
30-01-2014, 02:04 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 01:41 PM)TwoCultSurvivor Wrote:  I demand to know where this list of objective moral values is located and where it is connected by evidence to any God.

Bible. Duh. Rolleyes In amidst all the kiddy slaughtering and other stuff Tongue

What evidence would I require to believe in a non-interventionist creator ? Like say for example I'd made a bunch of self-aware robots and left them to their own devices, how would the little buggers manage to figure out that they had been made as opposed to forming without intelligent intervention ?

Well, it's a difficult one. But we've also got to consider, ourselves, the alternate hypothesis that we were *not* made by some intelligent being. And the evidence for that hypothesis is too strong to ignore. Our clear relationship with all life around us, the fossil record showing human evolution... you could say 'but what if God was driving evolution ?' but now your God is hiding in the gaps - hiding where scientific knowledge is not quite enough to banish him. What worth is a God like that ?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-01-2014, 02:06 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
I guess this is the point that you have to start trying to deal with multiple branches of questioning simultaneously and then at the end, like a good drama, bring all the story lines together in a cliffhanger.

(30-01-2014 10:35 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  ...
You probably didn't read either of the other threads that I posted,

Probably not. I can't remember. All theists look alike to me.

Quote:...
as probably my most core belief if that the creator gave me intelligence and reason
...

I quick overview of the mechanism and process for that occurrence would be useful.

Thanks.

I can wait. Take your time.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
30-01-2014, 02:13 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 11:46 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  The idea of a non-interventionist creator is one who set initial conditions and kick started the universe. Just because he doesn't intervene in what we choose to do with his creation on a day-to-day basis, doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't care about humankind (he did go to the trouble of creating us, afterall, or at least setting initial conditions that would inevitably lead to our creation), and I disagree that knowledge of such a being is irrelevant.

First, it gives us a basis for objective moral values, which atheism does not.

A noninterventionist creator could just as easily be a 10 year old in a super-unverse, who used SimUniverse to set the initial conditions, and turned it in as a science project that received a C for unoriginality.

There is no good reason to even suspect that such a noninterventionist creator cares whether humans exist at all, or even knows it. It does not imply an afterlife, and provides no basis for objective moral values either.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes toadaly's post
30-01-2014, 04:16 PM
RE: What sort of evidence would it take for atheists to believe in a creator?
(30-01-2014 06:21 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(30-01-2014 01:07 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  1. I will be making a numbered bullet list too.
2. "Are you as totally obnoxious IRL as you appear to be on TTA ?" is a question. (see 1)
3. You must have been very average in every respect to have never been marginalised. (see 2)
4. Igtheism and atheism are not your words as far as I'm aware. I'm also impressed that you perspective is not based on anyone else's thoughts. I like to read so I can learn things, some of us aren't blessed in original thought like you. (see 3)
5. You're welcome to think believe and whatever you want. That you identify as something which lacks a belief in what someone else believes is your call. Why don't you identify as someone who aphilatelist, unless of course you collect stamps?Wink (see 5)
6. How do you know this? Shouldn't you be sceptical? (see 5)

1. Good for you. How original.
2. It's rhetorical. We already know you are. You already have provided all the evidence we need. It's not really a question, idiot. I certainly am not interested enough to find out.
3. Complete meaningless drivel. I see you have no clue. Ignorant projecting again. I got into Harvard when I was 16. Is that 'average " to you ? THIS week I actually sent out ...never mind. Why bother.
4. Your point is ? More meaningless drivel.
5. Irrelevant. More meaningless drivel.
6. I think someone as totally ignorant and idiotic as you shouldn't be handing out advice. If I need any, I'll be sure and ask.

In summary. Go fuck yourself with a cactus.

1. I copied your use of a bullet list, if you hadn't realised. I was being factious as you used a bulleted list to appear as if you had some concise points to make, yet you had little points of relevance to make.

2. How would you know that I was obnoxious (like you presume me to be) in real life? As shown by the question mark "?", this is an actual question.

3. Let me guess this is your method of proving you're not average in everything? Bless. By your impeccable logic given you went to Harvard you have never been average in anything, or marginalised. I'll presume you didn't major in logic. I love people who feel the need to spout their credentials/achievements online, as if it means something or somehow adds weight to your perspective. I base my opinion of you on what you've said here, so far , this doesn't validate your perspective.

4. You don't grasp much do you? (This is rhetorical) You claim to have reached igtheism/atheism without being influenced by anyone else. I would call bullshit. Do you deny any cultural impact, or by today's scientific paradigms, educational system, hell you may have even read some books which swayed your thought. Your claim of being an ideological island would require some justification would it not?

5. Unless you make a positive affirmation of what you believe and why, why would you identify as an atheist? You can also claim you don't collect stamps (a-philatelist)

6. How dreary.

Very original, this has been used by tourette's. Are you a sock-puppet?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: