Atheists, I want to know why you believe in what you believe in.

[Cool]

14 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

My primary issue is in having to "believe" in everything that falls under the category of unseen "angels, jinn, heaven, hell, barzakh, reality of actions, soul... etc".

Everything is related with "The Truth" (Al-Haqq). Once you believe in Him, there is no reason to not believe or doubt in what He has promised. 

So if there is no God, there is no burden on me that I believed in Him & on the unseen He has promised. But if there is God & I denied Him and what He has promised, that would be a serious error. 

When He is able to produce living things from "Turab" (Dust) and "Maa" (Water), He can produce life from fire & from the droplets of wudu (وضو). 

 

[eThErEaL]

17 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

The China example isn't that bad actually. In reality China does not exist, I do not believe in the country of China. China is an imaginary man made concept - what exists is a piece of land that humans have agreed to call China and set up artificial borders. Seen from above earth, one would just see land, mountains etc. But since it is helpful to have this artificially made "country" - we all go along with it.

exactly!   Look at al the concepts in our mind about what China is and how almost nothing of it  resembles what we see from the sky.  Exactly. The mind believes in all sorts  of things and China is just one small tiny example.  We do that with what we mean by “self”, “other than self”, “my body”, “my place”, “your place”  we do this with EVeRYTHING.  

 

Quote

Take death as an example... the evidence that our time of death is "written" or fixed time is imaginary just as much as China.

yes.

 

Quote

 

Life expectancy and statistics are correlated to many things. Our deaths can be a result of a number of factors including genes, quality of life, medicine, exercise etc. However to help people feel good about deaths, we need to imagine there is fixed time for all of us. So like China, it helps to buy into these beliefs.

even the notion of “life” is itself constructed by our mind.  The notion of “death” is constructed by the mind. The notion of “genes” and health” etc etc

Quote

I've discussed my issues with religion many times over on this forum, I'll just refer you to this post as a summary:

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235068594-atheism/?do=findComment&comment=3319159

 

So if if everything is just a mental concept (or can be boiled down to mental concepts), what exactly is REAL!!  Is reality just a mental concept?  

Edited November 12, 2020 by eThErEaL

[Cool]

On 11/10/2020 at 8:25 PM, ServantOfTheHousehold said:

we believe that prophet Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) split the moon. To us that's proof. The crack is still there after more than 1400 years. Isnt that proof that islam is the religion to follow??

How can you even say that the crack is still there? Lets see a hadith:

وقال الإمام الصادق (عليه السلام): اجتمعوا أربعة عشراً رجلاً أصحاب العقبة، ليلة أربعة عشر من ذي الحجّة، فقالوا للنبي (صلى الله عليه وآله): ما من نبي إلاّ وله آية، فلما آيتك في ليلتك هذه؟.
فقال النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله): ما الذي تريدون؟ فقالوا: أن يكن لك عند ربّك قدر، فأمر القمر أن ينقطع قطعتين، فهبط جبرائيل (عليه السلام) وقال: يا محمّد، إنّ الله يقرؤك السلام ويقول لك: (إنّي قد أمرت كل شيء بطاعتك)، فرفع رأسه، فأمر القمر أن ينقطع قطعتين، فأنقطع قطعتين، فسجد النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله) شكراً لله،... ثم قالوا: يعود كما كان؟، فعاد كما كان.
فقالوا: يا محمّد حين تقدم سفارنا من الشام واليمن فنسألهم ما رأوا في هذه الليلة، فأن يكونوا رأوا مثل ما رأينا علمنا أنّه من ربّك، وأن لم يروا مثل ما رأينا علمنا أنّه سحر سحرتنا به، فأنزل الله تعالى: (اقْتَرَبَتِ السَّاعَةُ وَانشَقَّ الْقَمَر) [تفسير القمّي: 2/341].

Please note the highlighted underline phrase "يعود كما كان؟، فعاد كما كان." It means "Return as it was, then returned as it was.

So if it returned to its earlier state on the command of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)., there should be no cracks (caused by its splitting) on it now.

[khamosh21]

On 11/12/2020 at 6:06 PM, eThErEaL said:

exactly!   Look at al the concepts in our mind about what China is and how almost nothing of it  resembles what we see from the sky.  Exactly. The mind believes in all sorts  of things and China is just one small tiny example.  We do that with what we mean by “self”, “other than self”, “my body”, “my place”, “your place”  we do this with EVeRYTHING.  

 

yes.

 

even the notion of “life” is itself constructed by our mind.  The notion of “death” is constructed by the mind. The notion of “genes” and health” etc etc

So if if everything is just a mental concept (or can be boiled down to mental concepts), what exactly is REAL!!  Is reality just a mental concept?  

i don't get it. things around us are not "mental concepts". for example this cat, this tree, these mountains, stones etc, how are they mental concepts? 

if someone dies, their bodily existence is gone... so how is death constructed by the mind? how is this similar to "china"? 

sorry this doesnt make sense to me... 

Edited November 14, 2020 by khamosh21

[eThErEaL]

5 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

i don't get it. things around us are not "mental concepts". for example this cat, this tree, these mountains, stones etc, how are they mental concepts? 

if someone dies, their bodily existence is gone... so how is death constructed by the mind? how is this similar to "china"? 

sorry this doesnt make sense to me... 

https://youtu.be/lyu7v7nWzfo

first watch this video and let me know what you think.

Edited November 15, 2020 by eThErEaL

[eThErEaL]

7 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

i don't get it. things around us are not "mental concepts". for example this cat, this tree, these mountains, stones etc, how are they mental concepts? 

if someone dies, their bodily existence is gone... so how is death constructed by the mind? how is this similar to "china"? 

sorry this doesnt make sense to me... 

 Also this.

[Shahrukh K]

12 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

i don't get it. things around us are not "mental concepts". for example this cat, this tree, these mountains, stones etc, how are they mental concepts? 

if someone dies, their bodily existence is gone... so how is death constructed by the mind? how is this similar to "china"? 

sorry this doesnt make sense to me... 

It is like the flower and its colour. Without flower -- no colours; without colour -- the flower remains unseen. Beyond is the light which on contact with the flower creates the colour. Realise that your true nature is that of pure light only, and both the perceived and the perceiver come and go together. That which makes both possible, and yet is neither, is your real being, which means not being a 'this' or 'that', but pure awareness of being and not-being. When awareness is turned on itself, the feeling is of not knowing. When it is turned outward, the knowables come into being. To say: 'I know myself' is a contradiction in terms for what is 'known' cannot be 'myself'.

[khamosh21]

On 11/15/2020 at 6:27 AM, eThErEaL said:

 Also this.

I just watched this... oh man... this was mind blowing, I'll probably have it watch it a few times. Going to watch the one above first.

Thanks for sharing!

[khamosh21]

On 11/15/2020 at 6:27 AM, eThErEaL said:

 Also this.

alright... i haven't been able to stop thinking about this guy's analysis...  barely was able to sleep... so help me understand this... there is SOMETHING there that we are able to perceive... our mind interprets that something as different objects, or in other words our mind assigns meaning to that something like we assign meaning to China?...

however he also says and i think you said our mind constructs reality, if we are not looking at something it stops existing... however there has to be something there for our mind to interpret it, has to have been there from before.

also what is "consciousness" how is it defined... 

[eThErEaL]

On 11/17/2020 at 5:48 PM, khamosh21 said:

alright... i haven't been able to stop thinking about this guy's analysis...  barely was able to sleep... so help me understand this... there is SOMETHING there that we are able to perceive... our mind interprets that something as different objects, or in other words our mind assigns meaning to that something like we assign meaning to China?...

however he also says and i think you said our mind constructs reality, if we are not looking at something it stops existing... however there has to be something there for our mind to interpret it, has to have been there from before.

also what is "consciousness" how is it defined... 

so this video was just there to shake things up a bit.  To make you not take for granted that what you perceive corresponds to something external and outside of you.  

Think of the famous philosopher, Bishop Berkeley, who said that “to exist is to be perceived”.    

I mean...  think of the “Brain in the Vat” idea that brought up in philosophy of mind all the time:  Just imagine if your brain was in a vat.  How do you not know your brain is not in a vat?  
 

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by eThErEaL

[eThErEaL]

On 11/17/2020 at 5:48 PM, khamosh21 said:

alright... i haven't been able to stop thinking about this guy's analysis...  barely was able to sleep... so help me understand this... there is SOMETHING there that we are able to perceive... our mind interprets that something as different objects, or in other words our mind assigns meaning to that something like we assign meaning to China?...

however he also says and i think you said our mind constructs reality, if we are not looking at something it stops existing... however there has to be something there for our mind to interpret it, has to have been there from before.

also what is "consciousness" how is it defined... 

[khamosh21]

On 11/21/2020 at 8:09 PM, eThErEaL said:

so this video was just there to shake things up a bit.  To make you not take for granted that what you perceive corresponds to something external and outside of you.  

Think of the famous philosopher, Bishop Berkeley, who said that “to exist is to be perceived”.    

I mean...  think of the “Brain in the Vat” idea that brought up in philosophy of mind all the time:  Just imagine if your brain was in a vat.  How do you not know your brain is not in a vat?  
 

 

 

sorry i had been busy for past week or so, didn't get a chance to reply...

so where is this going or what am i supposed to understand from this? suppose yes this is the way reality is that you are describing.

when you say there is no birth or death, what you are saying is that my reality of who I think I am is not correct... there is a greater reality at play, namely God, and He doesn't die, nor is He born...

this doesn't help the fact that this me, even though I don't understand what this me is, certainly didn't always exist (not that I know of), nor do I know what happens when this body and it's cells eventually expire...

 

 

Edited November 30, 2020 by khamosh21

[khamosh21]

and yes I have to assume that reality/existence has always existed and will always continue to exist... how or what this reality is... i don't know and don't know if it can even be put into words that could be understood... i feel like an ant trying to understand the world around it...

Edited November 30, 2020 by khamosh21

[eThErEaL]

2 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

so where is this going or what am i supposed to understand from this? suppose yes this is the way reality is that you are describing.

I don't think I can describe what reality is.  I don't know what reality is (positively).   I only know what it is not.  I know it is not this or that thing.  I know it is not anything that has a boundary or limit.

 

 

2 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

when you say there is no birth or death, what you are saying is that my reality of who I think I am is not correct... there is a greater reality at play, namely God, and He doesn't die, nor is He born...

There is birth and death for things in the phenomenal world.  If you are a phenomenon (a thing which appears) in the world then you are susceptible to birth and death.

The background in which phenomenal things appear within and disappear from, this background is reality as such (which as we said earlier, cannot be described positively for it has no boundaries, or limits).

 

2 hours ago, khamosh21 said:

this doesn't help the fact that this me, even though I don't understand what this me is, certainly didn't always exist (not that I know of), nor do I know what happens when this body and it's cells eventually expire...

If you see yourself as a feeling, a body, a thought, or a sensation, then yes, you can say that you certainly did not exist.  Feelings, Body, Thoughts, Sensations are phenomenal things that appear within the background of reality which itself is not susceptible to cause and effect or birth and death.  Don't take my word for it!  I don't expect you to "believe" in what I am saying. But you can easily get at least a glimpse of this so called "background" within which things appear and disappear by simply meditating.  

 

[Zainuu]

On 11/10/2020 at 2:32 AM, ServantOfTheHousehold said:

Hi there. I know I haven't been posting in a while, but I finally thought of a good topic.

So, Atheists why are you in your religion???

PS: I'm not trying to trigger anyone so please don't attack me for making this topic

According to Chris Hedges, many prominent atheists go so deep in their denial of religion and god that they naturally acquire a set of principles that makes them forming some virtual sort of religion or ideology. He calls them 'New Athiests' who are as dangerous as some religious fundamentalist extremists.

I myself hope to read this soon:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1888742.I_Don_t_Believe_in_Atheists

So, what I basically observe in this dogma of atheism is that :

No one can deny the idea of God. 

If someone tries to do so, then also he will have something in his mind and heart that sees something as a God. Maybe Science, Nature etc. A person like Richard Dawkins or (say) Dan Barker can deny God only through their words. That's it. Their fitrah can never deny this. If they run away from an absolute God (Allah), their fitrah will demand for something in that place. 

So, denial of Allah leads to either some weak form of monotheism or maybe Polythiesm, Satanism or Dualism. 

To Conclude, something they will choose for sure. Maybe they claim divinity for themselves (Astaghfirullah).

[Yaa ALI madad]

I like to think of it this way

we have eyes to see, ears to hear, nose to smell, what if there is so much more but we just don’t have the organs to realise it just like a person born blind and deaf will never realise what its like to see or hear?

theres countless evidences around us about there being a god (but thats coming from a muslim point of view), technology has advanced so much yet we still don’t know absolutely nothing! Theres so much we havent seen out there, and even on our own planet for example the ocean? How much of it is still undiscovered?

We literally know nothing

How can anyone come to the conclusion of ‘there is no god’ or something behind all of this with the little knowledge that we have!!!

the real question is, would the world have been a better place if there was no religion?

[eThErEaL]

1 hour ago, Yaa ALI madad said:

I like to think of it this way

we have eyes to see, ears to hear, nose to smell, what if there is so much more but we just don’t have the organs to realise it just like a person born blind and deaf will never realise what its like to see or hear?

theres countless evidences around us about there being a god (but thats coming from a muslim point of view), technology has advanced so much yet we still don’t know absolutely nothing! Theres so much we havent seen out there, and even on our own planet for example the ocean? How much of it is still undiscovered?

We literally know nothing

How can anyone come to the conclusion of ‘there is no god’ or something behind all of this with the little knowledge that we have!!!
 

1 hour ago, Yaa ALI madad said:

the real question is, would the world have been a better place if there was no religion?

That is personal.  Depends from person to person.

[Yaa ALI madad]

28 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

That is personal.  Depends from person to person.

Yes youre right, our thoughts might all be different

but the one thing we humans all have in common is, our destination which is our grave. Then we will find out whether there is a Creator or not. If you right, then we’re just be forever sleeping and I don’t mind sleeping, but what would my point be being alive be?!? Just another waste, came and went. It can’t be, it just don’t make sense

Say you are right and there is not God (for the sake of arguement) what do you think about religion? Was it better for humanity or not?

we’re only given so much time to question and search for those question, don’t jump to conclusions my friend, ask before it’s too late

[Abu Hadi]

On 11/9/2020 at 4:45 PM, eThErEaL said:

which beliefs, I have all sorts of belief.

I believe that I can trust my memories to help me have a productive day.  For example, I wake up in the morning and have memories of what I do for a living.  I don't bother doubting this and asking for evidence, I simply just follow along without even questioning them.  And I find my memories useful in living!   

What is amazing to me is that you have one proof of what you do for a living, i.e. your memories, and you believe in that. Yet, all the proofs that exist for the existence of God, yet an atheist doesn't believe in God. 

Edited December 1, 2020 by Abu Hadi

[313_Waiter]

9 minutes ago, Abu Hadi said:

Yet, all the proofs that exist for the existence of God, yet an atheist doesn't believe in God. 

I suppose the atheists’ standards of proof are only empirical proofs, deductive or inductive arguments have not convinced them.

[Zainuu]

1 hour ago, 313_Waiter said:

I suppose the atheists’ standards of proof are only empirical proofs, deductive or inductive arguments have not convinced them.

Agree completely. 

The claims of Atheists goes against the deductive or inductive logic. 

Shaheed Baqir Al Sadr (رضي الله عنه) proved this argument in his book: The Revealer, The Messenger,  The Message. 

https://www.al-islam.org/revealer-messenger-message-sayyid-muhammad-baqir-al-sadr/part-1-revealer#how-apply-method-prove-existence-creator

Do have a look. 

He also provides a philosophical argument. 

 

[eThErEaL]

14 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

What is amazing to me is that you have one proof of what you do for a living, i.e. your memories, and you believe in that. Yet, all the proofs that exist for the existence of God, yet an atheist doesn't believe in God. 

I believe in that because it is practical.  If believing in a god is practical for you, then good for you.  I am sure it is practical for whosoever believes in a god.  I t might be because it gives them a sense of comfort or it makes them less scared to live in a world that is full of unknowns.  Whatever it is, it should be practical.  And that is the purpose of a belief.  An atheist does not have beliefs that are not all that practical to them.  

 

[eThErEaL]

12 hours ago, Zainuu said:

Agree completely. 

The claims of Atheists goes against the deductive or inductive logic. 

Shaheed Baqir Al Sadr (رضي الله عنه) proved this argument in his book: The Revealer, The Messenger,  The Message. 

https://www.al-islam.org/revealer-messenger-message-sayyid-muhammad-baqir-al-sadr/part-1-revealer#how-apply-method-prove-existence-creator

Do have a look. 

He also provides a philosophical argument. 

 

 

1. Every effect has a cause.

2. The lower cannot be the cause of something higher than itself, with regard to degrees of being.

3. The diversity of degrees of being in this universe and the variety in its form are qualitative.

There is no actual cause and effect.  or rather, this is not a universal principle. 

  

 

 

[eThErEaL]

14 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

I suppose the atheists’ standards of proof are only empirical proofs, deductive or inductive arguments have not convinced them.

We require evidence to substantiate our beliefs.  No evidence, no validity in beliefs

Edited December 2, 2020 by eThErEaL

[Abu Hadi]

15 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

I believe in that because it is practical.  If believing in a god is practical for you, then good for you.  I am sure it is practical for whosoever believes in a god.  I t might be because it gives them a sense of comfort or it makes them less scared to live in a world that is full of unknowns.  Whatever it is, it should be practical.  And that is the purpose of a belief.  An atheist does not have beliefs that are not all that practical to them.  

 

You are sidestepping the actual point I was making. It has nothing to do with being practical, it has to do with being consistent. If you believe in x (x could be anything, practical or impractical) because of evidence y, yet in the same breath you say I will never believe in a (say a is God in this case) even though there is evidence b,c,d,e,f,g,h,etc, then you are not being consistent in your beliefs. You are showing a clearly illogical biased toward not believing in a. If fact, whenever someone brings evidence for a, you disregard it with some semantic acrobatics, that is showing a clear bias. 

To illustrate this, lets say that instead of a being God, in the above case, a is love. I tell you that there is such a thing as love. You tell me no there isn't. Then I give you evidence for it (mother hugging her child, two young people kissing each other, people going off to war to fight for their country, etc). You deny all of this as a reality and contribute all these actions to other things, lust, infatuation, greed, etc. What would you think about such as person ? Would you think they are being logical / rational, or would you think they have a biased against believing in love and that is why they are refusing all this evidence ? I chose love because love, like God, is not something you can't put under a microscope or store in a jar. You can't experience it directly with your senses, but you can only experience it's effects indirectly thru it's effects on other things. 

Edited December 2, 2020 by Abu Hadi

[eThErEaL]

21 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

You are sidestepping the actual point I was making. It has nothing to do with being practical, it has to do with being consistent. If you believe in x (x could be anything, practical or impractical) because of evidence y, yet in the same breath you say I will never believe in a (say a is God in this case) even though there is evidence b,c,d,e,f,g,h,etc, then you are not being consistent in your beliefs. You are showing a clearly illogical biased toward not believing in a. If fact, whenever someone brings evidence for a, you disregard it with some semantic acrobatics, that is showing a clear bias. 

To illustrate this, lets say that instead of a being God, in the above case, a is love. I tell you that there is such a thing as love. You tell me no there isn't. Then I give you evidence for it (mother hugging her child, two young people kissing each other, people going off to war to fight for their country, etc). You deny all of this as a reality and contribute all these actions to other things, lust, infatuation, greed, etc. What would you think about such as person ? Would you think they are being logical / rational, or would you think they have a biased against believing in love and that is why they are refusing all this evidence ? I chose love because love, like God, is not something you can't put under a microscope or store in a jar. You can't experience it directly with your senses, but you can only experience it's effects indirectly thru it's effects on other things. 

My point was that it is not practical because there is no evidence from experience.  

Edited December 3, 2020 by eThErEaL

[eThErEaL]

On 12/1/2020 at 6:00 AM, 313_Waiter said:

I suppose the atheists’ standards of proof are only empirical proofs, deductive or inductive arguments have not convinced them.

deductive proofs are not practical as the premises can always be disputed.

inductive proofs are practical but also don’t yield 100% certitude.  There are many grades of induction.  Some stronger than others.  I don’t think inductive proofs for God’s existence strong.  

 

[Abu Hadi]

2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

My point was that it is not practical because there is no evidence from experience.  

Do you deny that love exists ? 

[eThErEaL]

On 12/1/2020 at 8:54 PM, eThErEaL said:

 

1. Every effect has a cause.

2. The lower cannot be the cause of something higher than itself, with regard to degrees of being.

3. The diversity of degrees of being in this universe and the variety in its form are qualitative.

There is no actual cause and effect.  or rather, this is not a universal principle. 

  

 

 

@Zainuu

i took it from what you have shared, the deductive argument of Shaheed a Baqir Sadr.  

Edited December 3, 2020 by eThErEaL

[eThErEaL]

1 minute ago, Abu Hadi said:

Do you deny that love exists ? 

(Alhamdulillah) I am experiencing love all the time.  So no.

Edited December 3, 2020 by eThErEaL

[eThErEaL]

2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

deductive proofs are not practical as the premises can always be disputed.

inductive proofs are practical but also don’t yield 100% certitude.  There are many grades of induction.  Some stronger than others.  I don’t think inductive proofs for God’s existence strong.  

 

What don’t you agree with exactly?

[Abu Hadi]

2 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

(Alhamdulillah) I am experiencing love all the time.  So no.

How are you experiencing love ?

Edited December 3, 2020 by Abu Hadi

[Zainuu]

On 12/2/2020 at 7:24 AM, eThErEaL said:

There is no actual cause and effect.  or rather, this is not a universal principle. 

Baseless. Disagree.

[eThErEaL]

4 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Baseless. Disagree.

Prove it.

You see, cause and effect is not universal because if it were it would apply universally!  Even to God!  @Zainuu

Edited December 3, 2020 by eThErEaL

[eThErEaL]

2 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

 

24 minutes ago, Abu Hadi said:

How are you experiencing love ?

I love myself.  I just can’t help but love myself.  Everything I do is for the sake of myself!

Edited December 3, 2020 by eThErEaL