Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[BADecker]

''inducing'' thoughts by stimulating a brain doesn't mean the thoughts are from a god or another being, that's not even close of being evidence of that mate.

But that wasn't the point. The point was that your thoughts aren't your own, wherever they come from. You simply like to bring God/god into things, and then suggest that I was suggesting God.

Use your head for something besides a hair-rack, for once. Cause and effect dictate how things work. This is the best that science has for brain and mind. If science is incorrect in this, show it. What have we found that is truly spontaneous? If we haven't found anything truly spontaneous, then it all operates by C&E. Or do you like guessing?

Of course, if you are balled, you wouldn't be using your head for a hair-rack. Or do you wear a wig?

So we don't have free will.  

Get your story straight.

Scientific ignorance shows that we don't have free will.

Get your story straight.

[1713522901]

1713522901

[1713522901]

1713522901

[1713522901]

1713522901

[af_newbie]

''inducing'' thoughts by stimulating a brain doesn't mean the thoughts are from a god or another being, that's not even close of being evidence of that mate.

But that wasn't the point. The point was that your thoughts aren't your own, wherever they come from. You simply like to bring God/god into things, and then suggest that I was suggesting God.

Use your head for something besides a hair-rack, for once. Cause and effect dictate how things work. This is the best that science has for brain and mind. If science is incorrect in this, show it. What have we found that is truly spontaneous? If we haven't found anything truly spontaneous, then it all operates by C&E. Or do you like guessing?

Of course, if you are balled, you wouldn't be using your head for a hair-rack. Or do you wear a wig?

So we don't have free will.  

Get your story straight.

Scientific ignorance shows that we don't have free will.

Get your story straight.

Either you have a C&E or a free will.  You cannot have both.

Your world view has a conflict.  The universe is either deterministic or non-deterministic.  Not both.

[Siren]

I belive that you are not an atheist because for all i know is ‘they dont hate God or religion’(since religion are the believers of God)instead they don’t only believe the God existence
I know few people whos claiming to be atheist wayback in college and this is their stand,i dont know why you are saying thered a ‘hate’when i guess there are still respects that existing in them.

[BADecker]

''inducing'' thoughts by stimulating a brain doesn't mean the thoughts are from a god or another being, that's not even close of being evidence of that mate.

But that wasn't the point. The point was that your thoughts aren't your own, wherever they come from. You simply like to bring God/god into things, and then suggest that I was suggesting God.

Use your head for something besides a hair-rack, for once. Cause and effect dictate how things work. This is the best that science has for brain and mind. If science is incorrect in this, show it. What have we found that is truly spontaneous? If we haven't found anything truly spontaneous, then it all operates by C&E. Or do you like guessing?

Of course, if you are balled, you wouldn't be using your head for a hair-rack. Or do you wear a wig?

So we don't have free will.  

Get your story straight.

Scientific ignorance shows that we don't have free will.

Get your story straight.

Either you have a C&E or a free will.  You cannot have both.

Your world view has a conflict.  The universe is either deterministic or non-deterministic.  Not both.

Science has a conflict. Science says that cause and effect rules. They prove it by not being able to find anything that is truly spontaneous. But they also don't like the idea that they don't have free will. So, what is it?

Science has found countless trillions of things that work by cause and effect = determined will. When are they going to find something that is truly spontaneous so that they can suggest that we might have free will after all?

[af_newbie]

''inducing'' thoughts by stimulating a brain doesn't mean the thoughts are from a god or another being, that's not even close of being evidence of that mate.

But that wasn't the point. The point was that your thoughts aren't your own, wherever they come from. You simply like to bring God/god into things, and then suggest that I was suggesting God.

Use your head for something besides a hair-rack, for once. Cause and effect dictate how things work. This is the best that science has for brain and mind. If science is incorrect in this, show it. What have we found that is truly spontaneous? If we haven't found anything truly spontaneous, then it all operates by C&E. Or do you like guessing?

Of course, if you are balled, you wouldn't be using your head for a hair-rack. Or do you wear a wig?

So we don't have free will.  

Get your story straight.

Scientific ignorance shows that we don't have free will.

Get your story straight.

Either you have a C&E or a free will.  You cannot have both.

Your world view has a conflict.  The universe is either deterministic or non-deterministic.  Not both.

Science has a conflict. Science says that cause and effect rules. They prove it by not being able to find anything that is truly spontaneous. But they also don't like the idea that they don't have free will. So, what is it?

Science has found countless trillions of things that work by cause and effect = determined will. When are they going to find something that is truly spontaneous so that they can suggest that we might have free will after all?

The concept of free will is a religious invention to explain why God created evil or is allowing evil to exist.

There is no conflict in science.  The scientific method works by establishing causalities.  Free will cannot be a subject of a scientific inquiry.

I just pointed out that you have an issue with free will and C&E (which you attempted to prove God, by excusing God from C&E rules).

Religions (with the notion of free will) basically say that the world is non-deterministic, i.e. causes and effects do not exist.  To reconcile with reality (where we clearly observe causalities) religions says that everything is caused by God.

The religious world view is non-deterministic and deterministic at the same time.  That is one of the reasons why I think religions are basically mass, incoherent delusions.

If you don't see the problem with this line of religious thinking then I cannot help you.

[Astargath]

''inducing'' thoughts by stimulating a brain doesn't mean the thoughts are from a god or another being, that's not even close of being evidence of that mate.

But that wasn't the point. The point was that your thoughts aren't your own, wherever they come from. You simply like to bring God/god into things, and then suggest that I was suggesting God.

Use your head for something besides a hair-rack, for once. Cause and effect dictate how things work. This is the best that science has for brain and mind. If science is incorrect in this, show it. What have we found that is truly spontaneous? If we haven't found anything truly spontaneous, then it all operates by C&E. Or do you like guessing?

Of course, if you are balled, you wouldn't be using your head for a hair-rack. Or do you wear a wig?

So we don't have free will.  

Get your story straight.

Scientific ignorance shows that we don't have free will.

Get your story straight.

Either you have a C&E or a free will.  You cannot have both.

Your world view has a conflict.  The universe is either deterministic or non-deterministic.  Not both.

Science has a conflict. Science says that cause and effect rules. They prove it by not being able to find anything that is truly spontaneous. But they also don't like the idea that they don't have free will. So, what is it?

Science has found countless trillions of things that work by cause and effect = determined will. When are they going to find something that is truly spontaneous so that they can suggest that we might have free will after all?

The concept of free will is a religious invention to explain why God created evil or is allowing evil to exist.

There is no conflict in science.  The scientific method works by establishing causalities.  Free will cannot be a subject of a scientific inquiry.

I just pointed out that you have an issue with free will and C&E (which you attempted to prove God, by excusing God from C&E rules).

Religions (with the notion of free will) basically say that the world is non-deterministic, i.e. causes and effects do not exist.  To reconcile with reality (where we clearly observe causalities) religions says that everything is caused by God.

The religious world view is non-deterministic and deterministic at the same time.  That is one of the reasons why I think religions are basically mass, incoherent delusions.

If you don't see the problem with this line of religious thinking then I cannot help you.

Of course he doesn't, he mentions cause and effect to debunk evolution but at the same time says people have free will when it comes to god, he doesn't even understand the contradiction, peanut brain.

[BADecker]

The concept of free will is a religious invention to explain why God created evil or is allowing evil to exist.

There is no conflict in science.  The scientific method works by establishing causalities.  Free will cannot be a subject of a scientific inquiry.

I just pointed out that you have an issue with free will and C&E (which you attempted to prove God, by excusing God from C&E rules).

Religions (with the notion of free will) basically say that the world is non-deterministic, i.e. causes and effects do not exist.  To reconcile with reality (where we clearly observe causalities) religions says that everything is caused by God.

The religious world view is non-deterministic and deterministic at the same time.  That is one of the reasons why I think religions are basically mass, incoherent delusions.

If you don't see the problem with this line of religious thinking then I cannot help you.

What are you saying? That there isn't any free will? If you think that way, why do you even waste time posting in the forum? Are you forced to post?

Everybody can see that there is conflict in science all over the place. Einstein didn't accept quantum physics. All kinds of scientists date the age of evolution critters all over the place. Science is full of conflict.

Why do you think that free will can't be a subject of scientific inquiry? DuckDuckGo search on "the science of free will." But if you think that scientists are wrong to consider free will in their investigations, then you have more scientific conflict.

Why does God have to submit to C&E rules? The whole creation shows that God is outside of the universe to have created it. Why do you think that things outside the universe must follow universe rules?

Finally you have hit on something that is correct. But you throw it out like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The problem isn't some line of religious thinking. The problem is that you don't even realize that your thinking is simply another line of religious thinking.

[af_newbie]

The concept of free will is a religious invention to explain why God created evil or is allowing evil to exist.

There is no conflict in science.  The scientific method works by establishing causalities.  Free will cannot be a subject of a scientific inquiry.

I just pointed out that you have an issue with free will and C&E (which you attempted to prove God, by excusing God from C&E rules).

Religions (with the notion of free will) basically say that the world is non-deterministic, i.e. causes and effects do not exist.  To reconcile with reality (where we clearly observe causalities) religions says that everything is caused by God.

The religious world view is non-deterministic and deterministic at the same time.  That is one of the reasons why I think religions are basically mass, incoherent delusions.

If you don't see the problem with this line of religious thinking then I cannot help you.

What are you saying? That there isn't any free will? If you think that way, why do you even waste time posting in the forum? Are you forced to post?

Everybody can see that there is conflict in science all over the place. Einstein didn't accept quantum physics. All kinds of scientists date the age of evolution critters all over the place. Science is full of conflict.

Why do you think that free will can't be a subject of scientific inquiry? DuckDuckGo search on "the science of free will." But if you think that scientists are wrong to consider free will in their investigations, then you have more scientific conflict.

Why does God have to submit to C&E rules? The whole creation shows that God is outside of the universe to have created it. Why do you think that things outside the universe must follow universe rules?

Finally you have hit on something that is correct. But you throw it out like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The problem isn't some line of religious thinking. The problem is that you don't even realize that your thinking is simply another line of religious thinking.

You guys claim that the world is non-deterministic and deterministic.

[BADecker]

The concept of free will is a religious invention to explain why God created evil or is allowing evil to exist.

There is no conflict in science.  The scientific method works by establishing causalities.  Free will cannot be a subject of a scientific inquiry.

I just pointed out that you have an issue with free will and C&E (which you attempted to prove God, by excusing God from C&E rules).

Religions (with the notion of free will) basically say that the world is non-deterministic, i.e. causes and effects do not exist.  To reconcile with reality (where we clearly observe causalities) religions says that everything is caused by God.

The religious world view is non-deterministic and deterministic at the same time.  That is one of the reasons why I think religions are basically mass, incoherent delusions.

If you don't see the problem with this line of religious thinking then I cannot help you.

What are you saying? That there isn't any free will? If you think that way, why do you even waste time posting in the forum? Are you forced to post?

Everybody can see that there is conflict in science all over the place. Einstein didn't accept quantum physics. All kinds of scientists date the age of evolution critters all over the place. Science is full of conflict.

Why do you think that free will can't be a subject of scientific inquiry? DuckDuckGo search on "the science of free will." But if you think that scientists are wrong to consider free will in their investigations, then you have more scientific conflict.

Why does God have to submit to C&E rules? The whole creation shows that God is outside of the universe to have created it. Why do you think that things outside the universe must follow universe rules?

Finally you have hit on something that is correct. But you throw it out like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The problem isn't some line of religious thinking. The problem is that you don't even realize that your thinking is simply another line of religious thinking.

You guys claim that the world is non-deterministic and deterministic.

Well, isn't that what you claim? Aren't some of the world's greatest thinkers racing with all their strength to find something spontaneous, just so they can study it? And aren't they doing it because they fear that Whoever or Whatever controls C&E just might take their artificial free will away from them... and they want to be ready with free-will/spontaneity so they can fight to keep their free will, artificial though it may be?

Do you even understand what I am telling you?

[af_newbie]

The concept of free will is a religious invention to explain why God created evil or is allowing evil to exist.

There is no conflict in science.  The scientific method works by establishing causalities.  Free will cannot be a subject of a scientific inquiry.

I just pointed out that you have an issue with free will and C&E (which you attempted to prove God, by excusing God from C&E rules).

Religions (with the notion of free will) basically say that the world is non-deterministic, i.e. causes and effects do not exist.  To reconcile with reality (where we clearly observe causalities) religions says that everything is caused by God.

The religious world view is non-deterministic and deterministic at the same time.  That is one of the reasons why I think religions are basically mass, incoherent delusions.

If you don't see the problem with this line of religious thinking then I cannot help you.

What are you saying? That there isn't any free will? If you think that way, why do you even waste time posting in the forum? Are you forced to post?

Everybody can see that there is conflict in science all over the place. Einstein didn't accept quantum physics. All kinds of scientists date the age of evolution critters all over the place. Science is full of conflict.

Why do you think that free will can't be a subject of scientific inquiry? DuckDuckGo search on "the science of free will." But if you think that scientists are wrong to consider free will in their investigations, then you have more scientific conflict.

Why does God have to submit to C&E rules? The whole creation shows that God is outside of the universe to have created it. Why do you think that things outside the universe must follow universe rules?

Finally you have hit on something that is correct. But you throw it out like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The problem isn't some line of religious thinking. The problem is that you don't even realize that your thinking is simply another line of religious thinking.

You guys claim that the world is non-deterministic and deterministic.

Well, isn't that what you claim? Aren't some of the world's greatest thinkers racing with all their strength to find something spontaneous, just so they can study it? And aren't they doing it because they fear that Whoever or Whatever controls C&E just might take their artificial free will away from them... and they want to be ready with free-will/spontaneity so they can fight to keep their free will, artificial though it may be?

Do you even understand what I am telling you?

No, I don't.

[ATMD]

Frankly, I am struggling to follow the rationale too lol

For what it is worth, I believe in free will. I don't know if BADecker is for or against the idea that we have free will, but I assume he is for because he believes in God.

There is no way God would create humans with no free will, that would be self-defeating.

[BADecker]

Science has found cause and effect. If, as the standard understanding of science is, there is no spirit or soul, then all things that we attribute to spirit and soul, are simply bio-electrical (or other) impulses that operate via C&E. All electrical impulses follow exact physical laws. Everything is programmed from the beginning... programming called cause and effect. No free will. Only programming.

But the scientists who think this way, still feel that they have free will to some extent. So, is the feeling of free will, really free will? Or is it artificial free will via C&E? If it is artificial free will, and there is nothing scientific that shows real free will, how do we know that we have free will, scientifically speaking?

The atheist who is a science buff, doesn't know that he has free will. He knows that he feels free will. But he doesn't know if it is artificial or real. He can only suggest artificial, because C&E is proven, but spontaneity hasn't been proven. To the atheist, everything is programmed, except that he guesses that there might be true free will that we don't know about.

The theist understands that there is free will, because God tells him that there is free will. But where does the free will lie? Just because a theist knows that he has free will, doesn't remove him from C&E programming, which programming says that free will is artificial.

From a theistic standpoint, we have free will. But our free will isn't what we think it is. We use artificial free will in our daily operations in lives, just like the atheists. We also use real free will daily (just like the atheists who don't know it), but we don't really know how we use it. It is a complete mystery. But we feel and use our artificial free will all the time.

[ATMD]

Science has found cause and effect. If, as the standard understanding of science is, there is no spirit or soul, then all things that we attribute to spirit and soul, are simply bio-electrical (or other) impulses that operate via C&E. All electrical impulses follow exact physical laws. Everything is programmed from the beginning... programming called cause and effect. No free will. Only programming.

But the scientists who think this way, still feel that they have free will to some extent. So, is the feeling of free will, really free will? Or is it artificial free will via C&E? If it is artificial free will, and there is nothing scientific that shows real free will, how do we know that we have free will, scientifically speaking?

The atheist who is a science buff, doesn't know that he has free will. He knows that he feels free will. But he doesn't know if it is artificial or real. He can only suggest artificial, because C&E is proven, but spontaneity hasn't been proven. To the atheist, everything is programmed, except that he guesses that there might be true free will that we don't know about.

The theist understands that there is free will, because God tells him that there is free will. But where does the free will lie? Just because a theist knows that he has free will, doesn't remove him from C&E programming, which programming says that free will is artificial.

From a theistic standpoint, we have free will. But our free will isn't what we think it is. We use artificial free will in our daily operations in lives, just like the atheists. We also use real free will daily (just like the atheists who don't know it), but we don't really know how we use it. It is a complete mystery. But we feel and use our artificial free will all the time.

“DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.” - Richard Dawkins

I disagree with Dawkins though. I believe that we are more than the sum of our genetic makeup and environment. We also have the spirit which can go against those two factors. The soul/spirit, which is independent of our genes and environment, gives us this free will.

You quoted Jesus yourself, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are "gods"'

[Astargath]

Science has found cause and effect. If, as the standard understanding of science is, there is no spirit or soul, then all things that we attribute to spirit and soul, are simply bio-electrical (or other) impulses that operate via C&E. All electrical impulses follow exact physical laws. Everything is programmed from the beginning... programming called cause and effect. No free will. Only programming.

But the scientists who think this way, still feel that they have free will to some extent. So, is the feeling of free will, really free will? Or is it artificial free will via C&E? If it is artificial free will, and there is nothing scientific that shows real free will, how do we know that we have free will, scientifically speaking?

The atheist who is a science buff, doesn't know that he has free will. He knows that he feels free will. But he doesn't know if it is artificial or real. He can only suggest artificial, because C&E is proven, but spontaneity hasn't been proven. To the atheist, everything is programmed, except that he guesses that there might be true free will that we don't know about.

The theist understands that there is free will, because God tells him that there is free will. But where does the free will lie? Just because a theist knows that he has free will, doesn't remove him from C&E programming, which programming says that free will is artificial.

From a theistic standpoint, we have free will. But our free will isn't what we think it is. We use artificial free will in our daily operations in lives, just like the atheists. We also use real free will daily (just like the atheists who don't know it), but we don't really know how we use it. It is a complete mystery. But we feel and use our artificial free will all the time.

''The theist understands that there is free will, because God tells him that there is free will.'' And how do you know that god is telling you that and it's not artificial free will via C&E?

See how stupid your arguments are? Seems like the C&E that programmed you, didn't make you too smart.

[BADecker]

“DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.” - Richard Dawkins

I disagree with Dawkins though. I believe that we are more than the sum of our genetic makeup and environment. We also have the spirit which can go against those two factors. The soul/spirit, which is independent of our genes and environment, gives us this free will.

You quoted Jesus yourself, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are "gods"'

I agree. However...

Be the person atheist or theist, disconnect his spine at the neck, and he can will to walk and wave his hands around all day, and it doesn't work, right?

Or take the whole and healthy person and let him will to fly through the air like superman. Does it happen? Or is his will only a wish or desire? But what about the free will to wish or desire? Isn't such set in place according to C&E causing certain synapses to fire in the brain? And isn't the C&E of the firing due to all kinds of C&E operations, which ultimately go back to the beginning, when everything was set in place by the way it was created?

Artificial free will only operates according to the way C&E allows it to act.

But since we are gods "to whom the Word of God comes," with real free will 'cause God says, why are we limited to using artificial free will? But if we use real free will, where and when and how?

This takes us into faith. "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God."

[BADecker]

''The theist understands that there is free will, because God tells him that there is free will.'' And how do you know that god is telling you that and it's not artificial free will via C&E?

See how stupid your arguments are? Seems like the C&E that programmed you, didn't make you too smart.

Read it in the Bible, and the Word resonates with my soul.

[MoonCrypt]

Its there decision to me such individuals have to exist one way or the other!!
the earth was not built for everyone to have the same belief! so this is just why its
there just have to be Atheists

[BADecker]

^^^ Why not have the same basic beliefs? After all, 100% of the people need air to breathe, water to drink, and food to eat. Since people are all the same in these basic ways, why not in the basic ways of believing in God?... which is more important than air, water, and food.

[af_newbie]

^^^ Why not have the same basic beliefs? After all, 100% of the people need air to breathe, water to drink, and food to eat. Since people are all the same in these basic ways, why not in the basic ways of believing in God?... which is more important than air, water, and food.

Because some people do not care if what they believe is actually true.  Psychological comfort is more important than the truth so people rely on emotions, gut feelings to make assumptions to get them to this psychological nirvana in the shortest amount of time.

Some people cannot live with the "I don't know" answers, so they make up answers.

[BADecker]

^^^ Why not have the same basic beliefs? After all, 100% of the people need air to breathe, water to drink, and food to eat. Since people are all the same in these basic ways, why not in the basic ways of believing in God?... which is more important than air, water, and food.

Because some people do not care if what they believe is actually true.  Psychological comfort is more important than the truth so people rely on emotions, gut feelings to make assumptions to get them to this psychological nirvana in the shortest amount of time.

Some people cannot live with the "I don't know" answers, so they make up answers.

LOL! There are loads of I-don't-know questions. You are simply talking about suicide.