The Libertarian Atheist

<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 680460288 22 0 262145 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@SimSun"; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 680460288 22 0 262145 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;} p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

First off, sorry for taking so long to respond.

When dealing with faith there is no logic and or consideration. If it were possible to make a logical choice based on fact and experience. Then there would simply be no need for faith. Since ample evidence and proof would be there. Now consideration is a different story.  And I don't have an easy time believing in the "Christian God", mainly because the entire concept is ludicrous and laudable at best. 

When you strip away everything pretty much every theological debate including this one boils down to whether the universe and/or existence came into being through accident or not. Those who believe it did do not base this on fact or evidence. Any first year physics student will tell you that according to all known laws of science we can never know what happened before the big bang. The information we need was lost in the singularity of near-infinite energy and mass, we can only speculate. But my point is that atheists like myself would laugh at the suggestion that our lack-of-belief is based on faith (which I’ve always thought was just people playing with semantics) despite the fact there is no ‘science’ involved. "You see," we’d say "we simply see the idea of a creator god illogical."

The exact same way that any believer would look at the complexity of the universe and see that the creator god is the only logical explanation.

Don’t confuse logic with science.

This entire segment of your response is acting under the assumption that I was referring to a Judeo-Christian text.

Oh, I’m sorry, I wonder what could of given my that impression. Could it maybe of been this…?

We have that which has been handed down for thousands of years. In this sanctified book, we find the grounds to live good and wholesome lives.

…or this…?

We are given the promise of eternal life and salvation. Salvation from the human condition, from our flesh and our minds.  For those who would say that we don't need salvation.

… or this perhaps…?

Think about it. In the two thousand years since Christ walked this earth. We have killed, murdered, raped and continued to commit sins.  We commit the same sins in the newest ways.  Sometimes our moral expediency is to do so in the name of Christ.  How can we be so ignorant? How can we honestly believe that we are acting in "GODS" word?

…how about this…?

The lord and savior preached of peace.

Maybe I missed your sarcasm. I can see now that you appear to be more of a general Theist that a Christian. But the above seems to be pretty fucking Abrahamic to me (why do people say ‘Judeo-Christian’, they’re missing out the second largest and fastest growing part of the trinity).

Atheists and those of the faith are equally as ignorant since no-one knows the answer.

Then surely agnostics are the folks with the right idea? Oh wait, "they just make the entire situation worse" right?

 As to animals including primates, as far as I know they do not commit murder. Yes they kill in order to eat, that is natural order though.

I’ve seen countless nature documentaries in which animals kill other members of their own species for reasons that seem pretty fucking similar to the reasons humans kill. A stag killing its love rival, a group of chimps invading their enemy’s territory ect. Does a stag have a sense of the morality? I doubt it. Does a chimp? I doubt anyone’s qualified to say.

But all this is irrelevant to the debate.

Yes I was very well of what I had written and have my reason for doing so.  And your are incorrect they don't need to validate their actions. It is moral expediency plain and simple. The current system of rules does not allow me to take this course of action. So if I blame a greater power then it is okay and the blame is now shifted to that greater power.

I would argue that a suicide bomber does not blow up a marketplace for another reason and then posthumously in video clips uses their faith as an excuse. I believe it is their faith that tips their hatred for (insert anything here) into suicidal rage.

At this point we are going to have to just disagree. I don't personally believe human life has any particular value. And honestly if you are an person who believe life has no meaning and the logical end is nothingness.

Well yup, that first sentence is true at least. If you truly feel that life ‘has no particular value’ why do you attack those who believe life has no meaning? If life has value surely that gives it meaning and a meaningful life would be a valuable one?

Other than the instinct to preserve your life what point is there? That is the logical outcome of Nihilism. Nothingness, Atheists are a starkly different group of people and for the most part very pleasant to be around.

You’ve gone and confused me again. It seems you are saying that atheists and nihilists are different but atheism and nihilism are similar. In your first post you said,

"For that concept that life has no meaning, that all of this is so random?  That life will just occur in the universe and be intelligent?  Nihilism is that believe that life has no meaning and that all morals are just created by man.  If that is truly your calling, then why continue to struggle in this world?"

But you’ve got it ass backwards. Atheism and Nihilism are like Communism and Fascism. They might to someone look similar (dictatorships, police state, political prisoners) but are actually at opposite ends of the spectrum. Nihilism preaches there is no meaning, and therefore no point. Atheism (or at least my school of thought) preaches there is no meaning, so we have the fantastic opportunity to assign whatever meaning we wish. Our lives are richer for not living under the shadow of some omnipotent being. Our souls are the property of no one, if they even exist.

The fact that we have no celestial reward waiting for us at the end makes our lives no less pointless. And I find the constant suggestion of such by theists of all kinds and creeds immensely irritating.

 LMAO, A bit of a dick, try a massive fucking prick.  Since you like bringing up the Christian god so damn much let me talk about him for a bit. Old Testament, he is running around competing against Samarian, Hitities, Canaanites, Egyptian gods going my children are rebellious. At no point does he claim the other people just the Jewish. He sits there and condemns the faithful and puts them through hell so people will sing his praise. He supposedly creates Lucifer the light bringer as the Angel of Fidelity in order to test the faith. Yea, that is fucking beautiful. Then orders genocide against everyone who does not follow his belief. Welcome to the wonderful world of monotheism. So we move in to the New Testament, which has 4 gospels and 4 different fucking messages. Now how fucked up is that? Mark says "The end of the world is here, repent, repent." and then Matthew says "Follow the law, follow the law, follow the law", you have Luke who says "Ooops we were wrong, so here is how you set up the church and keep your followers." and John who says you all fucked up for taking it literally the kingdom of heaven is already here and the spiritual freedom that comes with practicing the faith.  So lets put it this way, Mark wasn't there. Matthew was, Luke is a liar and John was probably high. So what do we know about him from the new testament, well if Christ was his only son. He willing had him tortured, executed and ridiculed. Oh yea that was part of the plan. Nice going god. I would never submit my child to that and would be quite adamant about inflicting grievous bodily harm to anyone who tried.

I’m going to be honest. That was a hard read. Any kind of bible story I either find hilarious or debilitating boring. That was the later. You also ignored my point on your rather offensive belief that I exist to test your faith.

First and foremost I do not commune with any god. My faith teaches that prayers fall on empty ears. The only thing you can hope to get is that which you earn for yourself. Through you works and your own merit.  And if there is all powerful being is it my god? Most likely not if I am not mistaken I said that god would be unknowable and unquantifiable.

Oh yea fyi I consider God and the Universe as the same exact thing.  The fact science does not know everything does not guarantee the existence of a creator. But it also does not remove that possibility. Perhaps you should remember faith requires no justifications. And people will use any means to maintain their beliefs. Including you.

That just doesn’t cut it for me. We can’t know him because we’d never know him. Therefore he can’t be disproved. But it is good enough for you and that’s what matters. You’ve made clear you’re no fan of organised religion, and it is those people, the people who believe what we know for a fact to be made-up that I have a problem with. As I said above, there is only two answers to this debate, one of us is wrong, one of us isn’t. But as you don’t seem to believe that god plays an active role in the universe then it is impossible for either of us to be proven correct.

But here is my conclusion using logic to the question; Nothing could exist before existence. So nothing can be the creator of existence. It is my belief that existence has always and always will exist.

Of course, our universe and existence are probably not the same thing. So is it possible for someone to exist before the big bang and set it off? Yes. Would that someone be a supernatural omnipotent god? Fuck no. Firstly, an all-powerful being would be a complex life form. A complex life form must evolve inside a universe. If it was from a universe it would have to obey the laws of that universe. Secondly, the word supernatural is bullshit. If something happens inside the universe then it happens ‘naturally’. There is no supernatural or paranormal. Just natural and normal that we haven’t seen before.

So you see, my problem isn’t with the idea that our universe came into being through a planned set of events put into place by a intelligence. Or that "God and the Universe as the same exact thing". It’s just the idea of a omnipotent god is ridiculous. Mainly because nothing near its description could ever exist.

But I also think that a lack of belief is more powerful than belief and that faith as a whole does more damage than good. If you’re a sceptic then you ask more questions. Which in itself and through extension with the scientific method is the only way to ever find out anything about existence. You can discuss god ‘til the cows come home, but you won’t be any nearer the truth, or more importantly you can never know how near the truth you actually are.

Finally I’m going to quote Bill Maher, because I couldn’t sum up any better than this…

Faith is dangerous because it allows human beings who don’t have all the answers to think that they do. Anyone who tells you that they know, just know, what happens to you when you die, I promise you they don’t. How can I be so sure? Because I don’t know and they do not possess mental powers that I do not.

God* is smart enough to appreciate those people striving to improve their knowledge and wealth and to not waste useful time with bad explanations. For example, I can say that planets move the way they do because angels move them. But they move them in just the same way as if there was a force (gravity) which made them move. So, why not scrap the superfluous element (angels) that begs an explanation which is not provided.

The God hypothesis of the Universe's genesis is a bad explanation, because you have to explain how the superfluous, extremely complex entity came into being first.

* I believe a God-like entity can evolve into existence (and it might have already), simply by using science and increasing its knowledge. Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology. I hope our civilization can reach such a level, but for that we need to understand nature and apply those darwinian-like methods in a way that is most useful for each human individual: in our scientific research (selecting for the hypotheses that match reality and scrapping the ones that don't match or predict anything new), economy (selecting for the usefulness and availability of a certain good and just for that, not also for the proliferation of entities capable of coercion that, due to this fact, have far exceeded their attributions) and politics (selecting for competent leaders instead of people with good social skills).