• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Let's try to understand atheism

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can understand Shri ozone's POV..

If you could have respect and trust in your mother, believe a man as your father, whom your mother has pointed out.

Don't ponder on gossips outside that may mislead you. It will not only waste your time and energy but may make you feel sick.


I agree with Shri Sravna too..

With all your trust, belief, acceptance and love towards your mother, take all the necessary attempts to assert to the gossipers, what the reality is. And put an end to unwanted thoughts within yourself and that of gossipers.

 
C RAVI said:
I can understand Shri ozone's POV..

If you could have respect and trust in your mother, believe a man as your father, whom your mother has pointed out.

Don't ponder on gossips outside that may mislead you. It will not only waste your time and energy but may make you feel sick.


I agree with Shri Sravna too..

With all your trust, belief, acceptance and love towards your mother, take all the necessary attempts to assert to the gossipers, what the reality is. And put an end to unwanted thoughts within yourself and that of gossipers.
Click to expand...

Dear Ravi,

Good analogy.

The problem I see is if people are left to themselves, people are likely to get more and more lax in their beliefs and at some stage they would turn incorrigible. I think the theists if they are proud about their superior understanding of reality have an onus on them to correct the misconceptions of the rest for the well being of the society. It is not right IMO to consider a belief system of others as something that should be immune to influences. If so where is the question of elevation? Let the one with the better understanding rightfully prevail.
 
sravna said:
Again let me repeat I am only for healthy discussions which can help us gain a better understanding of reality.
Click to expand...
Dear sri sravna,
You can be only sure of what you offer. What you get is at best what the moderator thinks you deserve.
With cruelty in naration very evident, but not apparent, ylling the same thing over and over again, and moderation being what it is, one should feel content calling them a discussion and healthy is all that you can expect but cant find.

<Edtd-KRS>
Dear Ozone Ji,
I don't understand your comment about Moderation above. What do you imply?

Regards,
KRS
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ozone said:
Dear sri sravna,
You can be only sure of what you offer. What you get is at best what the moderator thinks you deserve.
With cruelty in naration very evident, but not apparent, yelling the same thing over and over again, and moderation being what it is, one should feel content calling them a discussion and healthy is all that you can expect but cant find.
Click to expand...
<Edtd - KRS>

Dear ozone,

I get what you mean...thats why in a debate we have to be worthy opponents

Debating is not all about winning but its all about learning.
As long we do not even mind learning from our opponent I feel it shouldn't be a problem to debate with anyone.

But at times some people just want to play fighter pilot and shoot at sight any info by their opponent and that whats really spoils the debate.
So I can understand how you feel cos I have felt that many times too but so far what ever thread Sravna has started does get a bit interesting.

After all anyone can try to dissect Atheism..even we Theist too can try to dissect it and only to realize its also Brahman.


P.S. One more thing..we need to keep our opponents busy too to know their mind pattern and thoughts..so this thread is a good exercise.
If we do not know our own weakness we will never know the strength of our opponents.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ozone said:
yes, the self made "kanTakassani" has been kind to him for a while now :)
Click to expand...


Kantaka Sani is that what you mean??

In that case we can only remove a thorn with another thorn.
So counter Atheism with Atheism itself.
 
Yamaka said:
Let me give my two cents here -

As a self-proclaimed Atheist this is what I am against, the IDEA of

1. The existence of the SNA in the form of a Human-Like Personal God (like Jesus, Rama, Krishna, Shiva or the unknown human face for the Muslims) who is All Knowing, All Powerful and Most Merciful.

2. The usefulness of PPB to bribe this SNA. (Item 1 and 2 are the Essence of Theism of all Religions)

3. The truthfulness of JPK. (This is the Core of Hinduism, besides the Casteism)

As a Naturalist, I admire once in a while the majesty of Nature: the Sun, the Moon, the Wind and the likes, as the People of Indus Valley Civilization did between 7000 BC to 1500 BC.

Between 1500 BC till today,

The Vedas came, Puranas came followed by Bible and Koran to the world (to propagate the IDEA mentioned above)... and the world took decidedly a backward step..

Fortunately, SET came by to save many of us...

But, still we have a long way to go to eliminate the fallacy of God, Ghosts, Spirits and Religions...

Wait & watch.

:)
Click to expand...


Shri Yamaka,

We can wait and watch with all interest and curiosity, if you could answer a simple question that Shri Srvana has raised in his OP.

It would be nice if you try to answer the questions of the opponents as rationally as possible, as convincingly as possible and as clearly as possible instead of repeating your same above statements again and again. Your POV's has been enough engrossed in all of us.

Since in this thread, Theists are attempting to understad Atheism and expecting Atheists to clarify the doubts of the Theists, it would be nice if "you" as a determined clear cut Athiest, answer the questions, raised by the Theists.

Unlike the thread "GOD Exists", this is the thread to request Atheists to clarify the doubts raised by the Theists.

To start with, you may attempt to answer Shri Sravna's points in his OP, if you please.


 
ozone said:
Dear sri sravna,
You can be only sure of what you offer. What you get is at best what the moderator thinks you deserve.
With cruelty in naration very evident, but not apparent, yelling the same thing over and over again, and moderation being what it is, one should feel content calling them a discussion and healthy is all that you can expect but cant find.
Click to expand...

As long as you are sure of what you can offer irrespective of anyhting else, I think you can steer the discussion in the right direction or at least end it gracefully. I am very well aware of some of the tactics repeatedly used by the atheists in the forum and to date I have not found a compelling rebuttal by them of the theists arguments other than dismissing them as delusions. You need to have the arguments if you are to be taken seriously. In their case importance is more of how to argue than focussing on the content.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I feel the atheists only deny the existence of one (or more) anthropomorphic god/s; it is not their case that Man's knowledge has reached fullness and there is nothing that Man does not understand and nothing which Man cannot subjugate and control to his advantage.

So long such an unchartered, unknown area exists, the atheists can find solace only in denying Gods in the form of humans.

The mistake lies with us, the religious believers. Instead of graduating to the level of finding the "God" within each one of us ourselves, we still keep nourishing the primitive belief of seeking God outside of us and even go to the extent of believing other humans like us to be God if they just perform one or two simple street-magic items skillfully!

As long as this brand of theism exists, atheism will also be. Atheists, imho, are people whose intellect refuses to accept anthropomorphic god/s but is not yet developed enough to search for God within themselves. Thus the atheists are one step above the routine breed of theists but have lost their way and direction!
 
It makes little sense to be agnostic about impersonal God and non believing about anthromorphic God. If the impersonal God is omnipotent what prevents him from taking human form and be among humans to set right any rise in adharma. Lord Vishnu has time and again descended on earth according to the scriptures whenever adharma peaked. There is no reason to believe in brahman and not believe in Vishnu.

God is within us but we need to make efforts to see the God in us. That is the whole purpose of existence, to see the divinity in us.
 
C RAVI said:
Shri Yamaka,

We can wait and watch with all interest and curiosity, if you could answer a simple question that Shri Srvana has raised in his OP.

It would be nice if you try to answer the questions of the opponents as rationally as possible, as convincingly as possible and as clearly as possible instead of repeating your same above statements again and again. Your POV's has been enough engrossed in all of us.

Since in this thread, Theists are attempting to understad Atheism and expecting Atheists to clarify the doubts of the Theists, it would be nice if "you" as a determined clear cut Athiest, answer the questions, raised by the Theists.

Unlike the thread "GOD Exists", this is the thread to request Atheists to clarify the doubts raised by the Theists.

To start with, you may attempt to answer Shri Sravna's points in his OP, if you please.
Click to expand...

Dear Ravi:

I have written extensively on many questions and issues raised by Theists, including dear Sravna and Saidevo.

No matter what any Atheist tells you, Theists will stick to their own

TRADITION and/or
FEAR and/or
Superstition.

If you still have issues, please frame it in the form of simple questions.

As I indicated before, you and other Theists "pretend to sleep".

How can I wake you all up, dear Ravi?

Cheers.

:)
 
Yamaka said:
Dear Ravi:

I have written extensively on many questions and issues raised by Theists, including dear Sravna and Saidevo.

No matter what any Atheist tells you, Theists will stick to their own

TRADITION and/or
FEAR and/or
Superstition.

If you still have issues, please frame it in the form of simple questions.

As I indicated before, you and other Theists "pretend to sleep".

How can I wake you all up, dear Ravi?

Cheers.

:)
Click to expand...

Ok Shri Yamaka, here we go:

Let us take the argument by the atheists against the first cause:

"It is possible for something to come into existence without a cause"

The question that is posed is: Can you elaborate how this is possible?

If you think this is not the stated position of the atheists against the first cause argument, Could you state the real position of the atheists and throw some light on that.
 
Theism and atheism is not two sides of same coin. There are various shades of theist and similarly there is various shades of Atheism.

I do not try preaching Christianity to the pope, why would I try to teach theism to an atheist. Similarly when an atheist tries to teach his philosophy I feel offended.

Why can we not accommodate each other.
 
sravna said:
Ok Shri Yamaka, here we go:

Let us take the argument by the atheists against the first cause:

"It is possible for something to come into existence without a cause"

The question that is posed is: Can you elaborate how this is possible?

If you think this is not the stated position of the atheists against the first cause argument, Could you state the real position of the atheists and throw some light on that.
Click to expand...

Dear Sravna:

For want of time, I did not go to the site you mentioned in the OP. I guess you are asking about 1. The First Cause 2. Intelligent Design 3. The Origin of Consciousness.

Since I am very much interested in the mind-set of the India91% and their understanding and perception of

1. The Existence of SNA = God
2. The Usefulness of PPB and
3. The Truthfulness of PJK, my answer to the Three Issues you raised, I must say "I am not interested".

For I am not an expert of Astrophysics. I don't know why Sun is about 93 million miles away, or why Moon is about 243,000 miles away from the earth. They know the answer, perhaps. Their answers may not interest me much. Same way how 4G wireless technology is different from the earlier 2G technology. Some specialists will know the answer. Their answers may not interest me.

Likewise, they may not be interested in knowing what my own research tells about short and long term memory in humans! Lol :)

Intelligent Design in another form of Theism, which I totally reject.

Conscience and the state of consciousness etc, as I told dear Saidevo long time ago, are nothing but what our specialized sensory neurons in the cortex tell us as to "what's right and what's wrong and what decision to make", which we all learned over billions of years of biological evolution. This ability is there with all of us whether we believe in SNA = God or not.

Again, to reiterate, happiness, altruism, conscience etc are all with ALL of us, whether we believe in SNA or not.

It's the ego of some of the Theists to believe that happiness, altruism and conscience etc are the exclusive domain and province of Theism.

Cheers.

:)
 
Last edited:
sarma-61 said:
The mistake lies with us, the religious believers. Instead of graduating to the level of finding the "God" within each one of us ourselves, we still keep nourishing the primitive belief of seeking God outside of us and even go to the extent of believing other humans like us to be God if they just perform one or two simple street-magic items skillfully!
Click to expand...


When I read this..I am reminded of a story I read once about a person who was
rigid Advaitin.
He used to shun even the idea of people praying to God externally in a temple and preach that God is within us and "Aham Brahmaasmi".

One day a Swamiji who was also an Advaitin but still understood that all modes of worship ultimately reach God decided to play a trick on this person.

The Swamiji saw this person in a market place and tapped his shoulder from the back and that person turned around and asked "Who is there?"

The Swamiji answered "Why are you asking Who is there? I thought its Aham Brahmaasmi so why this duality of me and you?
 
Neti Neti(Not this,Not this)....is a unique word

From the mouth of an Advaitin ..He is rejecting the Untruth.

From the mouth of an Atheist..He is rejecting the Truth.
 
Yamaka said:
Dear Sravna:

For want of time, I did not go to the site you mentioned in the OP. I guess you are asking about 1. The First Cause 2. Intelligent Design 3. The Origin of Consciousness.

Since I am very much interested in the mind-set of the India91% and their understanding and perception of

1. The Existence of SNA = God
2. The Usefulness of PPB and
3. The Truthfulness of PJK, my answer to the Three Issues you raised, I must say "I am not interested".

For I am not an expert of Astrophysics. I don't know why Sun is about 93 million miles away, or why Moon is about 243,000 miles away from the earth. They know the answer, perhaps. Their answers may not interest me much. Same way how 4G wireless technology is different from the earlier 2G technology. Some specialists will know the answer. Their answers may not interest me.

Likewise, they may not be interested in knowing what my own research tells about short and long term memory in humans! Lol :)

Intelligent Design in another form of Theism, which I totally reject.

Conscience and the state of consciousness etc, as I told dear Saidevo long time ago, are nothing but what our specialized sensory neurons in the cortex tell us as to "what's right and what's wrong and what decision to make", which we all learned over billions of years of biological evolution. This ability is there with all of us whether we believe in SNA = God or not.

Again, to reiterate, happiness, altruism, conscience etc are all with ALL of us, whether we believe in SNA or not.

It's the ego of some of the Theists to believe that happiness, altruism and conscience etc are the exclusive domain and province of Theism.

Cheers.

:)
Click to expand...


Shri Yamaka,

Your post above, addressing Shri Sravna, in attempt to answer his straight forward question or explaining the real position of the Atheists on the raised question, is totally irrelevant.

The below is what Shri Sravna asked you to clarify in his post #37

But, if you say, you neither have the interest personally to ponder over such a question nor the interest to put forward your views here, then it is fine.
sravna said:
Ok Shri Yamaka, here we go:

Let us take the argument by the atheists against the first cause:

"It is possible for something to come into existence without a cause"

The question that is posed is: Can you elaborate how this is possible?

If you think this is not the stated position of the atheists against the first cause argument, Could you state the real position of the atheists and throw some light on that.
Click to expand...
 
By failing to give an explanation , Shri Yamaka and other atheists in the forum, are tacitly admitting that they cannot give logical arguments against theism. The response of Shri Yamaka that he is not interested in answering the question is only a way of evading it.

The point is when you call yourself a rationalist, it is not just expecting others to be rational, you need to be one too. Can we now treat all the ramblings of Shri Yamaka in this forum as one without any substance, because all of them were based on the unsubstantiated premise of non existence of God?
 
sravna said:
By failing to give an explanation , Shri Yamaka and other atheists in the forum, are tacitly admitting that they cannot give logical arguments against theism. The response of Shri Yamaka that he is not interested in answering the question is only a way of evading it.

The point is when you call yourself a rationalist, it is not just expecting others to be rational, you need to be one too. Can we now treat all the ramblings of Shri Yamaka in this forum as one without any substance, because all of them were based on the unsubstantiated premise of non existence of God?
Click to expand...

Absolutely right, Shri Sravna..

It is not right to discard answering a question to the best of one's knowledge, understanding and belief, reasoning one's lack of interest, after asking the opponents to raise a clear question.

I don't think it reflects correct form of participation.

 
sravna said:
Dear Shri Ozone,

You need to address the person when you convey a message. Is it addressed to me?
Click to expand...
dear Sri Sravna,
In a thread based discussion, I usually do not write to or about a single individual unless it is a question raised to an individual or an answer to a question by an individual (as is the case here).
That to me looks like a personal exchange of information, which is better done in emails or PMs.
it is just a comment made based on the progress of the thread, not intended at any specific individual. Substitute 'you' with 'I' and it becomes my thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top