Serious Problems with Atheism

[Whateverist]

Oookay. Again, what does that have to do with atheism? You're just pulling a scientist's quote about one of his scientific views. This isn't a science site, although some of the scientists here can have that conversation with you if you want. Is that what you wanted instead of an atheist conversation?

How else can we continue to discuss atheism if we leave science out of it? Atheists constantly say there's no evidence for God, isn't that a scientific statement?

If you wish to talk about gods with people who don't already believe in them you probably do need to give them some reason to take the subject seriously.  I'm no scientist but I've never experienced anything of the supernatural variety and the category strikes me as problematic and most likely fanciful.  If you tell me god is a supernatural thing I can't take that seriously without some decent reason, evidential or otherwise.  Just bear in mind, what someone would require who is not already inclined to believe is probably more than you need.

---

You ask many questions for a single thread.  It might work better if you pick one at a time and devote a separate thread to each.

Speaking of meaning, does your God assign your meaning to your life?  How does that work in Christianity?  How does there being a God make your life meaningful?

God gives meaning to our lives by His very existence; with God existing, we have a chance at Eternal Life and Love, those are the Only things that give meaning to our otherwise pointless lives that end either in a hole in the ground or cremation oven.

So you can't believe we atheists are capable of experiencing love yet we're supposed to believe a supernatural being exists who makes up meaning out of nothing and hands it out to us just for believing in him?  Not very Christian of you.

---

As others have said . . . the above is just an opinion, and I disagree with Lewontin. If there is a god, and that god has any influence in the world, then that influence can be investigated. The problem is that a god which operates outside of what we might call nature, is working supernaturally, and so it does not follow any necessary laws, rules or procedures etc. As mere humans we cannot set up experiments to determine what is going on, if the results are outside a certain remit, ie. if they do not fit into a set of rules of some sort.

But as I said, if there is a god, and that god has any influence in the world, then that influence can be investigated. So for example, we can investigate the efficacy of prayer, using scientific study. Such studies have been done, and prayer has been found to be unreliable in the promotion of the curing of cancer patients. I believe that prayer may have some positive effects in peoples' lives, but such effects may be entirely placebo. If there really were prayers, answered by some god, using powers outside of nature, then that would be operating outside of any set of rules, laws, etc. which science could uncover and put to paper. But first, we would need to set up an experiment to show that there is some outcome from praying, an outcome which is set in motion by prayer, which could be demonstrated to be other than placebo in its effect, or not just some natural effect which we have not yet understood.

I do not view that as being a failure to search for an objective truth, as far as we are able. Merely inserting a god or some explanation outside of natural or material causes seems much more like a failure to search for truth, but rather an insertion of some unknowable, untestable speculation. Such an insertion does not derive any real knowledge IMHO !

So science does not in fact rule out explanations other than the material, but when put to the test, effects outside of the material have not been detected, nor been necessary. Furthermore, where in the past a god had to be invoked to explain phenomena, science has removed the need for that hypothesis in most cases.

There is much evidence of God for the open minded, for example using our logic to see that DNA could Never Code itself to Code itself to Replicate, it's an impossibly vicious circle. And experimentally proving prayer is like experimentally proving a son or daughter loves its parents. It's a relationship, and Prayer is a relationship, and if we pray to God just for a joke or to test Him, then He sees He is mocked, that doesn't bode well for a close relationship, with God, or with your spouse or child.

Nope.  Neither one of us knows that.  Just like neither one of us knows DNA came about through natural processes.  Your pre-existing assumptions lead you to say this sort of thing since it backs up what you want to believe.  I assume life did come to be through natural processes because I see no viable alternative .. BUT I do not argue that of course life came about because there is no clear alternative.  That would make a poor argument since I'd be using the conclusion as a premise .. just the way you do when you make the argument for design.