Here’s an interesting article from USA Today about the changing religious landscape
Americans who don’t identify with any religion are now 15% of the USA, but trends in a new study shows they could one day surpass the nation’s largest denominations — including Catholics, now 24% of the nation.
American Nones: Profile of the No Religion Population, to be released today by Trinity College, finds this faith-free group already includes nearly 19% of U.S. men and 12% of women. Of these, 35% say they were Catholic at age 12.
http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf
An interesting excerpt is:
•The percentage of atheist Nones — who say there’s no such thing as God — hasn’t budged in years.
…
“They’re a stew of agnostics, deists and rationalists. They sound more like Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine. Their very interesting enlightenment approach is like the Founding Fathers’ kind: Skeptical about organized religion and clerics while still holding to an idea of God.”
So what does this tell us? Well first, it’s good news, as the problem in this country is not so much the shortage of atheists as it is the power in the organized religions. If Nones grow and usurp religions, we will all benefit.
It also shows that the A-word is still avoided, and most poeple don’t know what it means to be an atheist and think its a bad thing. An atheist is not just someone who states definitively that no gods exist. Anyone without a deity or an active belief in a deity is an atheist, and that includes agnostics, rationalists, secular humanists, un-indoctrinated children, etc. I can’t fault the writer here, as everyone gets this wrong.
The number of people who call themselves atheist v agnostic is not all that important. I believe it’s better for us all to use the A-word because it is true and accurate, and will unify us, but the objective is unity.
It is important is that we Nones stick together and take down the walls against progress erected by our religious counterparts.
I think one take home point here is that Catholicism can cure a person of religious delusions. You don’t even have to be one of the thousands of altar boys molested by a priest either. The ridiculous dogma that surrounds human sexuality in the doctrines of the world’s wealthiest Nation/Church has cured many a young person as they become aware of the “sins of the flesh”.
If the Cardinals, Arch-Bishops, Bishops and other functionaries of the Catholic Church are going to be in heaven along with the child molesting priests they protect from prosecution, then I’ll happily go to hell along with all of the decent human beings.
It would be better if more people were comfortable with the A label, but as a transitional state getting rid of preposterous ancient superstitions is certainly a step in the right direction.
Without the tax exemptions and deductions and Gov’t faith based funding programs the none percentage would be even higher.
An interesting supposition was recently put forth on The FFRF broadcast. It was suggested that religious membership in the U.S. was partly out of balance as compared to other industrialized nations due to our lack of Universal Health care. Those in countries with Universal health care faced a lower risk of financial ruin due to catastrophic costs. Those with less financial problems and the associated worry had less need of religion, and so religion tended to “die on the vine”. It was proposed that this was a major reason, among others, that the religious right opposes Universal health care of any kind.
Yaaaawn. A little common sense would help here. Attacking the perverts of religion, which are the exception not the norm, or inventing imaginary reasons the imaginary religious right doesn’t support our future bankruptcy by health care, is not going to do anything constructive to cause more people to become atheists. What is woefully lacking in atheism is any real leaders who can construct a social framework that works as well as the social frameworks produced by religious people along with anyone who can intelligently communicate that framework to the culture. Any idiot can make fun of religious people or find inconsistencies in peoples lives, which doesn’t disprove religion as much as it proves peoples need for it. Idiots can destroy, it takes genius to create. When atheism produces people who are committed to constructing an atheistic paradigm to live by with the kinds of values, norms, taboos, etc. that have governed our current culture for millennia, then it will be able to compete for peoples devotion. Right now it is both profitable and safe to criticize religion. That’s because the freedom that provides both is based on a religious value system. When men are willing to lose their freedom, their money, their families, their homes, their honor, their careers, and their lives for atheism, then they will change and shape the world the way religious men have. Until then they’ll just sit comfortably on the fringes of culture involving themselves in their rhetorical masturbation sessions, tell jokes that only their cronies laugh at and make criticisms of religious people that even their own advocates acknowledge and resent. Quit borrowing from the bank of cultural theism and start producing what you pretend to so desperately want. Try living like a true atheist for a week and you’ll learn why your not an atheist as much as you are an anti-theist. In the words of that great atheistic philosopher, the Joker, “Introduce a little anarchy”. See how much you appreciate a religious culture that provides you the freedom to leach off of it’s values.
Wait – how the fuck does a ‘true atheist™’ ‘live’?
Yeah – if atheism was a religion, you might have had a point. But it ain’t, so you don’t.
Don’t think the Joker’s an atheist, since he sold his soul for a cigar to Neron.
I think the Scandinavian countries are pretty good counter examples which our Agent of Chaos needs to account for in his explanation. A population can go from a majority of believers to a majority of non-believers without inventing a replacement structure.
Yes, some of the attraction of organised religion is the social contact. No, I don’t see how a lack of belief in gods is enough common ground for creating an equivalent to a church. UU holds little attraction to me.
People certainly do enjoy Skeptic in the Pub events and turn out to listen to PZ or Richard or Dave when they are in town, but I don’t see this attracting the majority of non-believers on anything like a weekly basis.
I am an atheist and that’s the way I live, every day. That may imply that I am also skeptical of other woo or think religion is a net evil but it is not a requirement. You’re not going to tell us that no True Atheist(tm) can be an anti-theist or contradict your version of correct living, are you?
I really don’t think your advice is going to help anyone here to become ‘athier’.
Oh wow, here we go again… get ready for posts of dictionary definitions that irrefutably cover atheism but are vehemently denied, then the editing of posts that didn’t quite come out right, followed by the wholesale deletion of all posts that Doug’s cognitive dissonance can’t bear to let see the light of day…
Agentchaos makes a good point. “Live a week like a true atheist.” If you think about it, it does make sense. Without a creator (God) where does… your worth as a human being come from…your moral and ethical code…your sense of justice…your ability to love others….your sense of beauty?
What i guess it comes down to is what is true? One example is the Hindu holy book which tells us that the earth is on the back of elephants which is on a turtle,swimming through honey, etc.? Obviously this is in error, imperically.
Another example is the Christian Holy book. The book claims to be from an infinite being given to finite beings (us)and says that we can know there is a God by the things that are made (the universe)and our consciences (which reflect a moral law.) Do we have enough reasonable evidence to accept this to be true? Or do we just dismiss such claims automatically because of the ramifications?
Any of us atheists worth our salt should honestly investigate claims of such magnitude?
It seems more and more to me that my being an atheist is the height of arrogance. To make such a statement as THERE IS NO GOD is essentially making myself a god by affirming my vast, infinite knowledge of the universe, as to know all things, that there could not possibly be a God.
If we evolved by chance from random elements then these words we use, this blog… our lives… are meaningless.Also our discussions are really moot and worthless. Why would one random glob of elements really give a rats about another random glob of elements?
You may disagree…and say, “No..humans have worth…I have worth..what I say has meaning and is important.” I ask, why?..why do humans have worth?…why do you have worth?…Why would what you have to say be important and meaningful?
Maybe we should learn to doubt our doubts occasionally.
Still haven’t gotten that right, I see.
Really, you should stop acting the jilted lover, & a checkup @ a nearby therapist.
Oh that’s right – they’re all lefties conspiring against your crusade, along w/the rest of them.
Regardless, atheism – definition is:
n.
1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
Without gods – which are an essential ingredient in anything resembling a religion.
& that’s really all there is to it.
Now comes the tortured twisting of semantics, the argument of commonality, the ‘we all believe in something, that means you believe in somethin’, that makes it a religion, hyuk’.
Oh, & only my friends call me Doug. You ain’t 1 of ‘em.
Neoplasm
Do you really think that everyone doesn’t know you are Tregg? I think your agnosticism is a compulsion. You can’t suppress it even when you are intentionally trying to deceive.
Yawnnnnnnnn.
AgentChaos:
Many have already lost their lives. In muslim countries this is the penalty. The price today in the U.S. for admitting to atheism is that you cannot be elected to a public office, your friends and family ostracize you, your place of employment may fire you or discriminate against you in advancements. Serving on a jury or testifying on a court case may be denied. Atheists have had their lives threatened. Dan Barker and Annie laura Gaylor have had their lives threatened, yet they continue in the good work of the FFRF.
Atheism is not opposed to theism even though it is a direct opposite. Most atheists agree that anyone is free to believe anything they want to believe. It’s when the religious go out proseltyzing that atheists become concerned. It’s when the religious try to force religion into the public schools that atheists feel they must speak out. I can truly say that when the religious stop proseltyzing that the non-believers will also become silent. Unfortunately, this will never happen.
If an atheist finds that his atheism is hindering his social progress, then he should just lie about being an atheist. It should be clear to everyone that most peoples religions, especially politicians, are just a pragmatic decision like other career decisions. Nearly every member of congress is affiliated with some main line denomination. Does anyone really believe their values reflect their so called religious convictions. If every politician had to tell the truth for a whole day, then the whole system would collapse. You illustrate my point by borrowing from a moral framework, that you supposedly reject. Freedom is not a value of atheism, it’s a value of Christianity, which became a value of America. You use words like ostracize and discrimination because you are programmed by your religiously influenced culture to feel the “sin” of social injustice. Nonsense. If a Lion kills off another Lion king to preserve his life, he feels no remorse. He will eventually die and become dirt. No consequences. His survival is his highest priority. A true atheist would do the same. Furthermore, you are mistaken in thinking that the unbelievers will be silent if the believers are. Someone’s worldview must determine the framework of a culture. If not we will have anarchy until someone gets a big enough gun to impose their framework. Everyone and every culture functions by some worldview. That will either be determined by the dialog and will of it’s citizens or by an oppressor. In dialog, the majority will rule, in oppression, the tyrant will rule. Even in a free society there will always be dialog which leads to proselytizing. Your concepts of freedom, fairness, peace, social equality, etc. are theistic not atheistic. Stop borrowing from the theist to debunk him.
AgentChaos:
That is BS, sir. Christianity is about anything but freedom. You either believe a certain way or you pay the price. Freedom is a value of human beings. Everyone values their freedom. Christianity co-opted morality by claiming god to be it’s source. Morality existed long before the bible or anyone who called themselves christian.
Now you try to claim the concept of freedom is a Christian ideal? Asinine.
I don’t have to borrow from a theist to debunk him. He does this fine, on his own.
I just assume that for religion to survive it must change, and if history is any indication it probably will. What may be different this time is that “Religion” will have to change so much that it will cease to be, technically, religion. It will morph into “belief”, and it will be much more flexible and tolerant in accordance with modern societal values.
It’s still progress and if it happens that way, I will certainly welcome the advance. My biggest complaint now is that religious folks say they “know” god exists, and they “know” what he wants and they “know” so-and-so was the messiah, etc. That is demonstrably wrong..they do not know these things, they believe them, and if they just had the guts to say it like that the relationship between atheists and believers would improve greatly.
However, so long as fundamentalists keep claiming that stars that we can see 10 billion light years away are somehow only 6,000 years old, their dogma days are numbered.
AgentChaos
You are correct that the RR doesn’t support health care reform but your claim that reform would bankrupt the US is just ignorant. If you want to know how much you are paying for health care now and how much you will be paying in 2019 if reform doesn’t happen then read Ezra Kleins article about the Kaiser Family Foundations report:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/19/AR2009091900112.html
If you want to remain ignorant … as you were.
Germany the Swiss and others have universal care without going bankrupt.Some of these systems are private nonprofit some are public.The key is they made the call to insure all and worked from there.We on the other hand are too concerned with offending wall street.If nothing is done the cost will go up to cover ever larger numbers of uninsured.
Yeah, but here in the U.S. it’s all about the mighty dollar and not about the greater good of making sure that almost everyone in this country has health insurance..
Dave,
I almost felt like that threadhead was directed at me. But, that’s okay, because there has never been a time when I could not defend my point of view with logic and empirical science.
You quoted:
” •The percentage of atheist Nones — who say there’s no such thing as God — hasn’t budged in years.
…
“They’re a stew of agnostics, deists and rationalists. They sound more like Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine. Their very interesting enlightenment approach is like the Founding Fathers’ kind: Skeptical about organized religion and clerics while still holding to an idea of God.”
Dave, the erroneous conclusion you arrive at is that the “nones” are atheists. I am a “none” but I am not an atheist. And it is not because I believe somehow the “true religion” is out there to be found by the spiritual searcher. Religion is mythology and a scam run by fakers and witchdoctors to curry power and money, but, that fact, clear as it may be, does not mean the universe is an accident. Now, while I believe that if some being really did influence the beginning of the universe, he is sitting in a celestial lawnchair and watching chaos unfold, like dice rolling across the felt, and could care less if we survive or go extinct, because he’s watching billions of other similar stories unfold.
Now, we have had similar discussions before. Like is atheism a belief that god does not exist, or is it a non belief that he does exist???? And we’ve danced around the subtle nuances of the difference. My philosophy is that honesty dictates that “I don’t know”, and until the big bang can be reproduced under laboratory conditions, it’s the empirical scientific conclusion. “I don’t know”, is just a phrase that starts a sentence which really expresses the truth, “I don’t know everything”. Someone who draws a conclusion about everything before the facts are in is “religious”.
Freethinkers are never going to fit under the atheist flag. I’ve told you before, but apparently you were not listening. The one point all freethinkers agree upon is that no deity interferes with the affairs of men. And that philosophy is not atheist, it’s humanist. It allows for agnostics and atheists as well. It’s a flag we can all fly.
NeoWolfe
Psycho agnostic
Qu’est-ce que c’est?
fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa better
Run run run run run run run away
OH OH OH
good point whutthole,
I’ll have to research the amoeba language before I know how to answer.
NeoWolfe
What
Israeli prime minister refuses to halt settlements inspite of presidents plea.
High time to cut off the aid and let those land stealers pay their own way.
Reason – what’s being moderated on that topic, so knock that shit off.
KA
Sorry i didn’t know, i brought it up because of the meeting the president had with the two leader’s.
Sorry – thought that was common knowledge.
It is common knowledge that threads must never veer near criticism of gods chosen people. After all this is blog about religion!
What – you attempted a double-post, I let 1 thru to address this 1 last time.
Get this thru your thick skull once & for all.
You were peppering threads regularly & off-topic, w/a schizophrenic’s insistent urgency. You were asked to stop doing it by the blog’s head & other commenters. You continued doing so. You were told to stop doing it. You ignored polite requests & strict instructions, in that order.
You can bawl all you want about ‘censorship’, but the fact is you don’t play well w/others, you don’t listen but power thru, & you got your ass spanked.
So unless the thread’s about Israel or Judaism, your comments about either will NOT BE LET THROUGH.
Man up, grow a pair.
Don’t kid your post-altering-and-censoring self about what is going on here. Free speech got its “ass spanked” not me. So what if some don’t want to hear about these important issues (which are inappropriately avoided on this blog)? Free speech is messy. Grow at least one!
I’m not.
No, your obsessive noise did.
It’s not your personal sandbox. So go sell it somewhere else.
Oh wait – you tried that. Didn’t work out too good.
Now that was childish.
This blog which was once bustling with commenters is now dying. Here is what I think are the major contributors to this demise.
(1) The new format of the comments section is terrible. It creates a fragmented environment for discussion and exchange of ideas. I have read many posts complaining about this format and none in support of it.
(2) Dave does not post new threads often enough to keep readers and commenters interested in returning here.
(3) The censoring and altering of posts by KA is driving regulars as well as newcomers away.
This blog is potentially a useful tool in fighting the tyranny of religion. It is failing to do so under its current management.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Hold the bus.
I altered ONE post as a joke. You even cheered that. As to censoring, I received specific instructions from David about you. You are the only person being moderated. I’ve been exceedingly fair dealing w/you. In fact, I’ve let about 99% of your whining thru.
I’ve also had to chase off a coupla trolls. Trust me, none of you guys would’ve appreciated them.
So beg pardon if I’m not sufficiently chastened.
Oh wow. Now you’ve added pathological lying to your repertoire of infantile behaviors. FACT: the first post of mine that you altered as a “joke” was here: http://tinyurl.com/kppc54. FACT: you deleted a second post of mine and deleted your own here: http://tinyurl.com/ydnzz6h in order to hide your embarrassing inability to disprove that atheism is a religion.
I wonder how many more times you’ll have to be caught either sneaking around vandalizing the blog or lying through your teeth about doing it before Silverman finally has enough of your crap and starts to moderate you?
What a pathetic, little person who clearly feels he must feed his anemic ego by playing self-appointed blog policeman here. All kidding aside, your behavior here indicates that you really are mentally unbalanced.
And, again, I’ve saved this thread–just in case…
You may want to double-check that. I haven’t lied about anything.
I double, and triple checked it. Your exact words:
are unambiguously at odds with the demonstrable facts. You claim to have only tampered with one post, but I’ve proven that you’ve tampered with more. You’ve been caught in a LIE about the number of posts you’ve tampered with, and yet you continue to deny the obvious—that makes you a pathological liar.
You’re still wrong. Exact words were ‘altering & censoring’. But that of course doesn’t matter to Inspector Javert.
“An atheist is not just someone who states definitively that no gods exist. Anyone without a deity or an active belief in a deity is an atheist, and that includes agnostics, rationalists, secular humanists, un-indoctrinated children, etc.”
This is an interesting perspective. I don’t agree with it, but it’s not necessarily wrong, more a question of what definition is more standard and more useful.
I’m inclined to think of Atheists as people for whom the god hypothesis is not considered plausible, either because they have explicitly rejected it or never considered it. It seems to me like people most easily fall into three basic categories: Those who accept the god hypothesis (thesists), those who reject or are unaware of the god hypothesis (atheists), and those who have considered the god hypothesis but have not for whatever reason come down on one side or other (agnostics). Under that definition:
1. Atheists are atheists, of course.
2. Secular Humanists are atheists, since one of the tenets of Secular Humanism is the explicit rejection of god.
3. Rationalists (assuming we’re using the same definition) are not necessarily atheists. Descartes, for instance, even thought he had a proof for the existence of god.
4. I’m not sure what to think about unindoctrinated children. I take your point, but at the same time most children have already been indoctrinated one way or the other before they have the cognitive ability to ask the relevant questions. It doesn’t seem meaningful to me to assign a label one way or another to people who haven’t developed that cognitive ability yet.
5. And I think agnostics should be left alone in their own category–it’s a distinct philosophical position.
There’s another difficulty with the Agnostic label, too. Theists often point out, correctly, that it’s impossible to prove that something doesn’t exist, and then use that to try to argue that Atheism is impossible. It’s basically a cynical and manipulative attempt to bootstrap atheists into theists, and I’m sure you hate it as much as I do. I think it’s worth making an explicit distinction between people who can’t prove that god doesn’t exist but no more believe in him than in the flying spaghetti monster and people who are genuinely undecided.
AgentChaos– Can you clarify what you mean by “living like a true atheist”? Just so you know, some of us are atheists and _not_ anti-theists.
On 5. Agnostics. Whay are people agnostics? Some are no doubt agnostics because they are afraid to don the label of atheist, especially in front of friends and family who might disown them. There are then some people who, no matter the issue, simply do not want to make up their minds. Others may deep down be unable, perhaps due to “programming” from an early age, to shake the feeling that god exists. Even if they have been able to eliminate the existence of any god from any existing religion in their mind, they may still feel that some conscious entity, somewhere, may exist and have some involvement in our own being. After all, inventing gods has been an avocation of mankind for many thousands of years.
As far as AgentChaos, he does not seem to have a clue as to what he/she is talking about. He may be trying to draw a comparison between Christianity and atheism. I have heard it said that to be a Christian you must walk the talk. To be an atheist you don’t have to do anything out of the ordinary, simply have a disbelief in supernatural entities of any sort. From there, you might be able to put atheists in a plethora of categories due to differing views of various issues, but in the end, they are still atheists.
Hypotheses concern observed phenomenon. Gods are not observed. Therefore “Gods exist.” is not hypothesis. It’s an assertion and one that makes no sense as stated by theists.
Yet, astrophysisists declare that dark matter, and dark energy exist, yet there is nothing but faith to confirm it’s existence. Well let me play the atheist this time and affirm that both are bullshit invented to cover up bad math.
NeoWolfe
You just broke the densometer with that one.
Not true at all. Math is a to make predictions about observed phenomina. Furthermore, I’m sure that there are ways to test for dark matter, wheras there are no ways to test for gods, elves, pixies,…
To make the point clearer, science is based on testing ideas. That puts it in a completly different class than theology(the study of making sh*t up).
Aug2,
Math is a tool, and numbers don’t lie, but, they can certainly be misinterpreted. Assumptions can be made erroneously, and in fact, it happens all the time. And some of the real classics are Edwin Hubble and Albert Einstein.
But, it was not my intent to base on scientists, it was more to point out once again the ignorance of people who believe their best hunches are truth. I agree, there are no fairies or unicorns, but there is also no definitive proof of the existence of dark energy or dark matter. If you do some research with a skeptical outlook, you will see it is all based upon calculations made in the “red shift” of light frequency as compared to estimations of galactic mass based upon it’s light intensity. This light of which we speak may have traveled hundreds of thousands of lightyears through dust and gas clouds. It’s like forensic investigators making a cast of a shoeprint in the sand after a windstorm. The math cannot be trusted. Yet, the scientific community has gone wildly in search of a fairy called “dark energy” and a unicorn named “dark matter” without a clue of its nature. So they call it weakly interacting massive particles,WIMP, a force that can hold together a galaxy, or split galaxies apart, but can’t be detected. Sounds a lot like god to me. I hope I made my point.
NeoWolfe
Neowolfe is very confused. We don’t prove the existence of anything through science. Not anything. We create definitions for the assumed parts of a reductionist model and test the model for the ability to describe and predict our observations. To say that a component part of a model exists is to say that it exists as a useful construct. Nothing more.
Existence is a bullshit question asked by small minds inoculated with delusions of grandeur.
Have a nice day!
The observed phenomena in question are the existence of the universe, the existence of life, our sense of morality, complexity arising out of simplicity, etc. Take the existence of life: The question is “Where did people come from?” One hypothesis is “God created us.” Another hypothesis is evolution through Darwinian natural selection. I favor the latter and think that all of the evidence we have supports it, but “God created us” is still a hypothesis. “Hypothesis” doesn’t carry any implication of reasonableness or rationality or believability–”The Moon is Made of Green Cheese” is also a hypothesis. “Hypothesis” also doesn’t imply testable, which is why we have the expression “testable hypothesis.” John Stuart Mill once said “An hypothesis being a mere supposition, there are no other limits to hypotheses than those of the human imagination.”
Plus, referring to god as a hypothesis is strategically useful, because it moves the discussion into more scientific territory, where the standards of evidence are more strict.
Gods are not observable. Therefore “God created us.” is not a hypothesis. How do you propose to test this hypothesis? By removing the non-observed god (that component part of a system which is defined to be god in your model) in one experiment and replacing non-observed god in another experiment?
Come on man. Some questions and assertions are nonsense not because they are “wrong” but because they are without meaning.
Whutthole says, and I quote:
“Existence is a bullshit question”
Thank you, whutthole, for negating every atheist argument you have ever made, and once and for all labeling yourself as an amoeba. But, let me add, finally, after listening to your racist babble, that you have proved that you don’t even know what YOU believe. “God doesn’t exist, but the question of existence is bullshit” LOL, you’re as much an idiot as any fundy I’ve ever known.
NeoWolfe
Neoplasm
That quote of your’s is not something that I have written nor is it even close to being representative of anything that I have written.
I have never written that “God does not exist”. What I have written is that said assertion or the companion question “Do gods exist?” is nonsensical. The fact that you, after haunting this blog for as long as you have, still do not understand this perspective is staggering. You clearly have a desire to pigeonhole atheists so that you can carry on with your agnostic agenda.
When you misrepresent the writings of others what you are doing is telling others that what you desire is an imaginary dialog with yourself rather than a real dialog with others. A typical example of your misrepresentations is your incessant accusations of racism against me. I don’t think there is a single commentator on this blog that would characterize me as a racist yet you persist in doing so.
Your misrepresentations makes it clear that you desire an imaginary dialog. Perhaps you are doing this because your internal struggle against religion and racism is an unresolved one. Whatever the motivation it is clear that you have some “issues”?
interesting read here
AgentChaos….your right we should not label a whole particular group of people with an unacceptable behavior that is found across humanity….how ever….ridiculous claims demanding credibility and dam near obedience will always get my ridicule…and please donnot forget about the power these clergy demand….there is way too much room for the bad apples to operate from….
back to topic:
I agreeded with Dave up until the part about the A word is still avoided…
true you can find that in the older population, but, they,re gonna go croak eventually, while the youth rebels just by being agnostic….I’ll take an agnostic youth in the speed of the information age any day…..
Interesting how we hear someone label themselves and then want to debate with them about it if they don’t fit our own definition of the word.
If there are any atheists who believe they can prove that no god exists, I’ve never heard of them. I would also expect to find their proof wanting. The only time I come across this characterisation of atheists is when theists and sometimes agnostics use it as a strawman. Rather, I have so far seen no compelling evidence for a god and would be surprised should evidence for one appear. As in science, this position is tentative and can be revised in the light of new evidence.
I don’t live my life as if there are little people in the garden that will become malicious unless I do certain things to appease them. No little bowls of milk or trinkets to minimise their mischief. There have been times and places where this was a common enough belief that some people might have found it worthwhile to make it clear they didn’t accept it. In this sense, they were afaeryists because faeryism was the expected position in that culture. Only when theism loses its hold on pretty much everybody will atheism become as pointless a description as afaeryism. Wouldn’t that be nice.
If someone doesn’t live their life appealing to or trying to appease a god, if they don’t cringe at the possibility that it knows what they are doing or thinking, then I think they are an atheist. They may be very sure we cannot ever know if gods exist or not and if so, I agree, on that basis they are an agnostic. But, by my definition they are also an atheist. The stigma attached to it of course, is probably the reason for their rejecting the label in the first place.
Now if someone who doesn’t know if a god exists or not, decides to play it safe and do the propitiation and praying and sacrificing routine, then they are taking Pascal’s Wager. Their problem being of course that they may have picked the wrong god and the real one is jealous, or their insincerity is only making things worse, given its omniscience.
So yeah, this US poll contains good news. Finally starting to catch up to the rest of the civilised world. Joking. Really. Well mostly.
“… the objective is unity.”
Who decided this? How do you unite around a non-thing? I think you’re extrapolating a non-thing into an anti-thing, and that’s why you’re not getting this unity you apparently want.
Maybe a lot of atheists just aren’t interested in being anti-thing, and show that disinterest by categorizing themselves as “none”.
Geoih
I can’t decide whether your post is nonsense or antisense.
What a well thought out and reasoned response. I can’t understand why people wouldn’t want to be categorized along side you.
Thanks for proving my point.
Try writing something besides gibberish and you might get a serious response.
DD Dropout :
That no god exists? I think we can come close. Whereas the existence of god, a positive, should be able to be proven with ease, the nonexistence of anything cannot be proven. By observation we can see no supernatural involvement in our creation, and no involvement in our daily lives. We can therefore safely eliminate any god that might be suggested as having influence in our lives. This eliminates all the gods invented by mankind, as each is said to have some impact on our lives.
A prime mover? If a god can be imagined as having existed forever then why cannot a Universe that has existed forever be imagined also? Why is there an insertion of a god where there need not be one? Again, mankind is good at inventing gods, needing control over his environment and feeling helpless, it is no surprise.
Whereas a negative, there is no god, can never be proven definitively, a positive, there is a god, should be readily evident, and it is not so, therefore, why not go the whole nine yards, and eliminate the possibility of a god.
On a personal level that is what I have done. There is so small a possibility that there is a god, that that possibility can be dismissed. And so, I have.
dw,
I have read your posts, and I have always considered you a freethinker. But, all freethinkers don’t agree. But, we are still members of the “nones” aren’t we.
I’ve always kinda disliked philosophy, studying what other people thought or think. Much like religion, it’s like seeing the universe through other people’s eyes. But, here’s a fact that you cannot deny, that the only thing you can be sure of is that “I exist”. The rest of reality, as you perceive it, is through some degree of assumption or presumption.
Of course, religion is bullshit, but I wonder how it is that you make the giant leap from that fact to assume that the universe is an accident? That is why I call myself agnostic, I’m not an amoeba, but, science is science, and before you arrive at a conclusion, you should have the proven facts to back up your beliefs.
NeoWolfe-
Agnostic to me means “fence-sitter”. This term agnostic is used by people for the most part to avoid the label of atheist. Agnostic is more acceptable socially. You have rejected the christian god (not deserving of being capitalized) so you are an atheist where christianity is concerned. You are labeled such by believers. You are an atheist where all other gods are concerned, still though, you cling to the possibility.
Perhaps you believe in a prime mover as a friend of mine does. He is afraid to let go of belief totally as well.
Why does the Universe need a creator? For most people a creator does not need a creator. Why can’t they imagine a Universe that has existed in some form forever, be it a spot, or explosion, or it’s present grandeur?
Why do people who have had their god’s destroyed by science go looking under every leaf, every rock, to replace that god? Yes, I know you say you do not believe and that religion is bs, but you seem hesitant to go the extra millimeter to be an atheist.
Theists have worked hard to make the word atheist just as scary to adults as boogey man is to children. It took me a long time to look at the word differently. I have met many with the label atheist, and they are every bit as decent as all the other people I have met in my life.
What does it require to be a GOD is science reaching the point of creating GOD like abilities.The hebrews had a unseen God but the roman GODS were very human like.Would a superior alien being be seen as a GOD.
Ok enough is enough. I thought by playing the devils advocate, so to speak, maybe some of you guys might think through your beliefs a little more, but I’m really not the smartest person. I would venture to say that most of you probably won’t read through this, once you realize what it is, but hopefully I’m wrong. This is the truth whether you choose to believe it or not.
-The fool has said in his heart, there is no God. They are corrupt, They have done abominable works, there is none who does good.
-The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men WHO SUPRESS THE TRUTH in unrighteousness, because WHAT MAY BE KNOWN OF GOD IS MANIFEST in them, for GOD HAS SHOWN IT TO THEM. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are CLEARLY SEEN, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are WITHOUT EXCUSE….(they)became FUTILE in there thoughts, and there foolish hearts were DARKENED. Professing themselves to be wise they became fools.
-….God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting, being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness,full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness…..haters of God….proud, boasters….undiscerning…unloving…unforgiving, unmerciful.
-Your conscience also BEARS WITNESS of Gods law written on your heart.
-For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, sexual immorality, thefts, lies….(take note of your thoughts for just one day. Is this not true?)
-Your sins have separated you from God.
-The wages of sin is death. Eternal separation, (in a place of torment and punishment called hell), from the holy, pure, just, wonderful, all satisfying and loving God.
-Everyone practicing evil hates the light (the truth) and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.
-…all have sinned (broken God’s law)and fallen short of the glory of God (we have not loved, trusted and obeyed God and loved others as we were created to do) Are you perfect?……. I’m not.
-But God who is rich in mercy, because of His great love, has sent His son (Jesus Christ) into the world to save sinners. Jesus Christ is God in the flesh. He lived a sinless life (perfectly obeying God in the place of sinners); dying on a cross for sins (bearing the wrath of God in the place of sinners); being raised from the dead to PROVE He was the Son of God; He is alive now at the right hand of God and is able to save all those who come to God through Him.
-God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself.
-Whoever calls on the name of the Lord (Jesus Christ)will be saved.
-Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.
-Repent (turn from your sinful way of life) and believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.
That’s it, it’s all of grace (unmerited favor) nothing you can do, its all already been done, just receive the gift and follow Christ.
-The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
I urge you to seriously consider these truths. I’ve personally experienced the grace, forgiveness, peace and infinite love of our Creator in Jesus Christ. Nothing this world has to offer can compare with knowing God.
I risk the feeding of a troll, however, you must realize that to the non-believer scripture is of no value. Empty words of a soap-boxer.
Where there is no god, especially no Christian god, these words are not unlike the babbling of a drunk. Or, as in the case of many who participated in the writings, imbiber of opium.
You have not experienced the infinite love of your creator, you have experienced the euphoria of your delusion, nothing more.
DW …”you must realize that to the non-believer scripture is of no value. Empty words of a soap-boxer.”
-Yes, I realize that. But God’s word is living and powerful, powerful enough to change and enlighten the hardest of hearts, even yours. (By the way there is plenty of historical, scientific and archeological evidence to validate scripture.)
“Where there is no god, especially no Christian god, these words are not unlike the babbling of a drunk”
- …(unbelievers)walk in the futility of their mind, having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart…
…if the gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose mind the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.
“Or, as in the case of many who participated in the writings, imbiber of opium.”
-??????I’d really like to know where you get your history from.
“You have not experienced the infinite love of your creator, you have experienced the euphoria of your delusion, nothing more.”
- Hmmmm, really?
By the way I’m not sure how the term troll is being used, but thanks for lunch. LOL
My original statement above still applies. What you consider truths are merely statements unsupported by any evidence and could just as easily have been spouted by a bum in an alley who has taken time out from his bottle to mount a soapbox and proclaim what he feels are profound truths. And, I might add, just as easily dismissed.
DW
“What you consider truths are merely statements unsupported by any evidence…”
This is where you are wrong. And making such a statement tells me you haven’t done any serious open minded research into the matter.
(I hope you haven’t just jumped onto the atheist’s bandwagon without any serious consideration of its ramifications.)
Lots of times this can be an evidence of an attitude of not wanting to be accountable to a sovereign God for the manner in which you live your life, rather than on an intellectual basis. The Bible stands any test of historicity, science, and human experience.
Excuse me…
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s a laugh riot, fella.
Say something worthy of a response. Biblical gibberish is of no value to an atheist.
Yeah – people like Dennis Rader, or Charlie Manson. Or John Floyd Thomas Jr. Or Albert Fish. Or David Berkowitz.
Yeah, religion sure does improve people, don’t it?
Sounds like babblings regugitated from the pulpit and bible to me. Still, it prooves nothing except that the ignorant will still go on insisting that the love of god will save them.. Is simply being a non-believer a “sinful” way of life? I don’t believe in “sin,” so you’re barking up the wrong tree with that here.
Tregg says- (I hope you haven’t just jumped onto the atheist’s bandwagon without any serious consideration of its ramifications.)
What ramifications exactly? Hell? That seems to be the reasoning behind most believers beliefs, FEAR. Hello, do any of these people live in reality with the rest of us.. I bet next we’ll be hearing about how we need to be listening to kirk cameron. Maybe we won’t be left behind…
Oh Tregg, it’s so good to hear from you. It reminds me of the good old days when the uneasy marriage of pity and humour provided hours of sarcastic entertainment. It’s strange that I would rather read your wonderfully nostalgic platitudes and cliche than some of the enlightened non-believers here.
Nevertheless, your hackneyed entreaties are cause for sadness; why not try thinking for yourself. Don’t phrases like, “His invisible attributes can be clearly seen…”, give you pause?
You, like other theists, are consumed by self-loathing. Dip your little toe in the liberation of critical thought; it’s not that bad. We welcome you with open minds.
Obeah,
“Nevertheless, your hackneyed entreaties are cause for sadness; why not try thinking for yourself. Don’t phrases like, “His invisible attributes can be clearly seen…”, give you pause?”
-I see that you may not have understood the thought..let me explain…the invisible attributes of God that are clearly seen are His eternal power and Godhead…which means that He is the all powerful Creator God….the things that are seen are all of creation, (humans, animals, water, planets, stars, etc.) These are the visual, tangible evidences of His existence.(Being understood by the things that are made.)
“You, like other theists, are consumed by self-loathing.”
-Yes, I do loathe myself, in and of myself, my own sinful heart, that struggle with everyday.(In my natural self dwells no good thing.)
Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God, through Jesus Christ my Lord. (In my natural self dwells no good thing.)
“Dip your little toe in the liberation of critical thought; it’s not that bad. We welcome you with open minds.
-I would ask you also to dip and would welcome you.
WOW!
I haven’t been here for a while and now I find upon reading the previous thread that you Tregg, are a very bad boy.
Lying is not the same as playing Devil’s advocate.
Of course for you, feelings of shame are easily expunged; in fact it occurs to me that you people seek them out so as to be in a position to prove your pitiful state of sin and thus be eligible for forgiveness from the all knowing, all powerful Grand PooBaa.
Obeah,
Yes, I am a very, very bad boy (all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God…..there is none righteous, no not one….all have gone astray, each has gone his own way…) if that’s what you mean.
“Lying is not the same as playing Devil’s advocate.”
-I’d like to apologize for that. I guess I was intentionally trying to deceive. Sorry.
“Of course for you, feelings of shame are easily expunged;
-yes, by confession and trust in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ who bore my shame on the cross.
“…in fact it occurs to me that you people seek them out so as to be in a position to prove your pitiful state of sin”….
No, we don’t seek them out, but that is the proper response to sin…the proof of sin in an individual is not feelings…we can feel shame for things that are not sinful….how a person comes to a knowledge of sin is by the law of God. Compare your own life to the law of God (the Ten Commandments). How do you measure up? Have you loved God with all of your heart, mind, soul and strength and your neighbor as yourself? Perfectly in action, motive, attitude and intent. We don’t live up to our own standards much less God’s. Don’t compare yourself to other people but to God’s standard. Nobody is perfect, right? The failings at every point of the law that you see in your life is sin. We try to relativize it, “oh its not that bad”….We just can’t grasp the perfection and holiness of God. Sometimes seeing our sin for what it is, is like asking a fish to describe water, it is so much a part of who we are and the world we live in that we just can’t see it. That’s why the law of God was given, to act as a mirror to show us our sins, it was never meant to save us but to point us to the Savior, Jesus Christ.
“and thus be eligible for forgiveness from the all knowing, all powerful Grand PooBaa.”
- Belief and love of the truth or rejection and hatred of the truth. That’s the watershed point, so to speak, believe it or not.
Hi again, here’s one for you: I have not sinned. Oh yes, I have committed my share of immoral acts, but never sinned. Why? Sin pertains to a god, and since there isn’t any, there is no sin. There you have it Tregg, you’re better than you thought, for you haven’t sinned either.
dw
You have committed sin, by your own admission (..”your share of immoral acts”).
Believing something like, there is no God, doesn’t make it true. Just because you personally don’t acknowledge the truth (the Bible), doesn’t make it untrue and non-reality. Likewise, just because I believe it to be true doesn’t make it true. It is true because it is reality. Objective reality. So, your denial of your own sin doesn’t relieve you of the guilt and the consequences of it.
Your assertion that god exists is a positive assertion. Therefore the responsibility of proof is yours. The evidence for the existence of the christian god pales in comparison to the evidence supporting the assertion that there is no god.
As far as your statement that it is true because it is a reality: I could just as easily say that reality does not include your god.
I do not need forgiveness, I do not need to be relieved of guilt, not because I say so, but because it is a reality.
DW
“The evidence for the existence of the christian god pales in comparison to the evidence supporting the assertion that there is no god.”
If your so confident in your statement, as you seem to be, can you give three reasons to support it? Or even one would suffice?
Several of you guys have stated that atheism is on the side of reason. I don’t think there is any REASONABLE evidence to support your statement. I’d like to hear some of your main reasons why you believe that, if you please.
(By the way don’t try to dodge the question by asserting that proof is up to me. You’ve stated that there is evidence to support your claims…..present it.)
Look forward to reading your post.
1.In all of history there is not one verifiable miracle of any kind.
2. God is said to be all-powerful. What purpose does it serve to be cloaked in mystery, obfuscation, or absence when you are all-powerful.
3. There is no evidence that Jesus ever lived. The earliest verifiable, non-forged mention of Jesus being in the pages of the bible 40 or more years after Jesus’ supposed existence. Also, various other entities in other religious belief systems before and during Jesus’ time had figures with almost identical attributes. Obviously myth.
4.Evolution, which is scientific fact, does not provide any evidence of any creature having spontaneously arisen as asserted in the bible. Each life form being related to each other by some previous common ancestor. Be it fish, bug, or bacteria.
5.Prophecies outlined in the bible were all written after the fact.
6.Prayer has been proven no more effective than a placebo. What happens after a prayer is made depends on what action an individual makes, and what was going to happen all along without the prayer.
7.The Jewish people are said to be the favored people of god. If this is so then I would hate to be on his hate list.
8.God kills the innocents. Babies, children, mothers, innocent men and woman. He commands rape, murder, and robbery. How can this god be described as loving? When a murderer, rapist, or thief turns over a new leaf while in prison, do we open the doors of the jail cell?
9.Biblical text is so unnecessarily vague that it can be utilized by the most nefarious among us to manipulate individuals into doing his/her bidding.
…. and many more.
… And your evidence for a god must follow:
When someone is so obsessed with atonement, it makes me wonder what they’ve done. Tregg, you creep me out. Good for Halloween though; religion makes for excellent horror.
-Of course, atonement is paramount…..
-We don’t realize how horrible even one sin is…if you think only Hitlers and Dahmers need atonement… you are quiet wrong…I can’t tell but that seems to be what you are implying?
-Too bad that you’re creeped out but the message of the cross is foolishness and an offense to those who are perishing. (Which you needn’t be.)
I really wouldn’t call true Christianity “religion” if by religion you mean man’s attempts at pleasing/placating God by there own good works. Christianity is admitting that there is nothing I can do to please a holy God and I am completely helpless and guilty before Him. And that God out of love, grace and mercy has done all that I need to be forgiven and reconciled to Him.
Tregg’s off-topic blathering goes on and on and on. But where are the off-topic police, sergeant Dave and officer KA.
While I’m reluctant to feed trolls, I must reply. I’m quite (not quiet) serious about my questions–What have you done?! Why do you crave atonement? Hitler and Dahmer did NOT deserve any form of forgiveness, from nither humans nor from gods or goddesses (or unicorns or leprechans, or crickets, or komodo dragons, etc.). If you think they did, then again I ask, what have YOU done?
I have never done anything in my life that anybody needed (or needs) to die for; therefore I am not “perishing” and am quite happy. My motto is this, if an action has potential to induce agonizing lifetime guilt, that can’t be ascribed to typical “living and learning”, then don’t do it.
If you filter your life through reason and compassion, there’s no need to be fanatical about forgiveness, for reason and compassion would not allow for murder, rape, thievery, or any other henious crimes against humanity.
Self-actualization is dependant upon reason and compassion.
Tregg – reply to cry4turtles, but this is your 1st warning. You’re preaching here, & that’s not allowed.
Cry4turtles,
You are proving my point by relativizing your sins. It doesn’t matter if you are a mass murderer or a religious zealot (religious people crucified Christ). Your not understanding the purity and holiness of a perfect God compared with a human life of sin (even one, seemingly “small” sin). Our righteousness is as filthy rags (menstrual rags) to Him.
Krystalline Apostate,
Should I obey God or man? Hmmmm. God of course. By the way you seem to be the one I’ve noticed on these threads making the most personal attacks (w/ terrible profanity, I might add)Why? Frustration usually breeds these kind of things.
Have a nice day. Gotta get to church.
Play by the rules, or you get moderated.
By which you mean whatever you feel like, as there is no such critter.
Because we’ve all heard all this errant crap before. You aren’t the 1st godbot to come proselytize, you won’t be the last.
Be forewarned: you’re on probation.
Krystalline Apostate,
You seem to be very upset, there’s no reason to get so angry. But are my posts really that off topic? No more than any other person who is posting on this thread. (Most of my posting is in response to other’s comments.)
Is it because I’m using scripture in my arguments? Why would I not use the truth (the Bible) in my posts? If that is what we are really trying to get at, the truth? Belief that the Bible is true is very reasonable. I would hope most of the atheists blogging here are secure enough in their world view to have rational, reasonable debate with someone of an opposing view.
I’m not ‘very upset’, not that that has any bearing on any of this.
You’re derailing the threads w/your delusional nonsense.
Dude, we’ve all of us here studied your ‘scriptures’, & found them terribly vague, contradictory, cruel, & nonsensical.
That’s a pretty liberal definition of ‘truth’, I’d say.
The truth is reality.
Uh, no it’s not. Have you actually read the thing. I mean, w/a truly objective, critical eye? Questioned it intensely? That’s how I came to atheism – via my own exegesis.
Sure, if that opposing view has any rational, reasonable, sound footing. Unfortunately, the xtian POV has none of the above.
My “sins” are a figment of your imagination.
cry4turtles,
Your own sinfulness can be a hard thing to realize and even more so, to accept. Have you ever done anything that bothered your conscience? Do you have any regrets or remorse about past wrong actions? Of course you do, we all do.
Let’s turn it around for a minute, what if, say, someone stole from you or murdered a family member, would you think that the thief or the murderer had done anything wrong (sin)? Of course you would, you would want justice, right? But when you judge yourself, why do you not come to the same conclusion? Even if you never committed murder, you have probably been angry with someone and thought of murder. I guess you’ve never stolen anything either even something seemingly insignificant.
Have you ever committed adultery? Maybe not. But have you ever lusted in your heart after someone?
You needn’t answer these questions on the post but ask yourself these things, seriously contemplate them.
Why is it that when someone questions what you believe, you want to get rid of them. If you are secure in what you believe, then why wouldn’t you welcome the debate?
Belief has nothing to do with atheism. Atheism is arrived at by reason.
dw,
How do you reason that there is no God? How do you reason the existence of love? How do you explain with reason how someone comes to love someone so much they are willing to die for them, in their place? With reason, how does this come from evolution, which btw i do believe that an atheist believes in evolution, unless you ignore the reason we are here. BTW, please explain with reason why 100% of all living things die?
Wow, I guess ‘Weak’ is a description of your mind.
Where to begin? The wholly bibble is a pile of lies for starters. Look @ the world around you. What loving parent creates a world that is an obstacle course filled w/razor wire & biological claymores. & if the Jews were ever the ‘chosen people’, how come nobody came down from on high to step in on the holocaust? Why is there evil in the world? Why all the pain, suffering? & why is the universe 99.9999% inimical to human life? Real easy answer: nobody up there.
Really, how come you don’t do some research on the topic? Why do you folks always drop outta the sky w/o doing any background research whatsoever? Here’s a starter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruism
There’s the kicker: there is no reason we are here. This is known as the Teleological argument – it just looks like there’s a pattern, but all humans do is personify their environment. It’s a survival mechanism.
I accept evolution as the best explanation for how the state of living things have arrived at their present forms. No belief is involved regardless of what you think.
Love is an emotion which developed in those animals that became social groups as a means of survival. Mankind, due to it’s large brain capacity has developed it more artfully, but even an elephant can be observed remembering and mourning a fallen elephant. Love is a beneficial emotion and so became amplified, as it promoted the protection of offspring from outside pressures like predation.
Everything dies as it is not required that animals live much beyond that point where they procreate. The pressures of natural selection, selecting for ever more advantageous adaptations, does not favor the continued existence of one form.
Why is it that when people say they don’t believe in that supernatural nonsense, they have to pester & nag you about your non-belief?
KA
Answer: Out of love and concern for lost people (people who are spiritually dead and unable to discern the truth)and obedience to Christ.
I find it suprising that you would perceive open discussion with an opposing view point as pestering and nagging. Could it be your own conscience that’s pestering and nagging you? That can be an effect of hearing the truth.
It was a rhetorical question. But no, I actually do understand why you folks do what you do. Of course, you get awarded brownie points for ‘fishing for men.’ & really, what is this servant culture you people foster? ‘I serve gawd’ – ‘I yam a vessel for the lawd’ – ‘I am his eternal servant’. You’d think a supposedly omniscient, all-powerful deity wouldn’t be in need of servants. But of course, your imaginary friend is co-dependent, just as you are.
It is when I (& others here) have had the SAME.DISCUSSION.A.THOUSAND.TIMES – really, you’re not clever, nor original.
Standard fare – YAWN. Make it about the person, attack the person, make it emotional rather than logical. That’s a fallacy, BTW.
Yeah, keep telling yourself that. Maybe you’ll believe it. I sure won’t.
KA
You continue to prove scripture to be true by your comments. …proud, boasters, haters of God…no fear of God….but you don’t believe anyway so….
“really, you’re not clever, nor original.”
I think most of us on this blog probably want to be viewed by others as clever, wise or intelligent….another evidence of a sinful heart (pride) and the truth of scripture…I’m as guilty as the rest…but the statement you refered to above wasn’t of that sort.
“Could it be your own conscience that’s pestering and nagging you?”
Standard fare – YAWN. Make it about the person, attack the person, make it emotional rather than logical. That’s a fallacy, BTW.
That really wasn’t a personal attack, (sorry you took it that way), conscience is part of the evidence of the existence of a righteous God. I’m sure you have one too, no matter how you may try to silence it.
“It is when I (& others here) have had the SAME.DISCUSSION.A.THOUSAND.TIMES ”
Well, it should have clicked for you guys by now,… the truth isn’t changing,…. there is a God…. the evidences are plain…He has given us enough to know that He is… so we are all without an excuse…that’s why the arguments and discussions tend to be similar.
Guys, the evidence is all around you. Why do continue to ignore it?
Are you kidding? If I respond, your book is right? Are you really that stupid?
More utter nonsense. Oh wait – even disagreeing w/you is ‘proof’. Wow. That’s not an opposite viewpoint, that’s a closed mind.
Uh – actually, there’s a perfectly rational, non-supernatural explanation for that. For everything, in fact.
Sport, there is no evidence of a gawd. That simple.
Of course, you’re 1 of those idiots who points to everything, & says “that’s PROOF!”, but are unwilling to debate the subject, or even consider it.
Instead, you’ll just vomit up some crap about how ‘scripture proves it, & it proves the scripture’, not realizing what a truly circuitous bunch of nonsense you’re spouting.
Trgg says – another evidence of a sinful heart (pride) and the truth of scripture
AND – conscience is part of the evidence of the existence of a righteous God.
AND goes on with – the evidences are plain…He has given us enough to know that He is… so we are all without an excuse…that’s why the arguments and discussions tend to be similar.
NOTHING you have stated is evidence OR proof of god. good luck proving there is one. If the evidence is so plain why is it so obviously NOT plain OR obvious? I think you need to get out a bit more. I’d like to know how much time the “preachers” that come in here actually spend in nature. I don’t mean outside, I mean out where there are no other people IN nature.. Then I’d like to know how much you actually know about what is around you.
Again, in English, YES, I’ve made mistakes. NO, I’ve never, ever, not even in the least, done ANYTHING that anybody had to die for. Get it?
Let’s turn it around for a minute, what if, say, someone stole from you or murdered a family member, would you think that the thief or the murderer had done anything wrong (sin)?
Again, in English, people do right, people do wrong; “sin” has nothing to do with it and is a figment of your imaginary friend’s imagination.
I trust in the judgement of humanity (court system, etc.), a system based on logic and reason, not a jelous and vengeful gawd who, for a bit of insanity, allowed Jeffery Dahmer in. How could that not be the kicker for you?
See above.
I have not, but my ex did. Perhaps I should’ve led the stoning committe and, following the laws of your bibble, watched him slowly die while my throwing arm got a workout.
Maybe not. But have you ever lusted in your heart after someone?
Would that include chocolate?
Silly theist, made a funny! You might as well get back on the horse. There’s no sale here.
Some blockquote fauxpas. Sorry.
Cry4turtles,
You’re hearing the truth. That’s the point. It’s not to make a sale.
(I have a blog usage question for you. How do you get the quotes from other posts you’re replying to to be displayed in blue? Is it just cut and paste?)
Thanks for the info
1.In all of history there is not one verifiable miracle of any kind.
2. God is said to be all-powerful. What purpose does it serve to be cloaked in mystery, obfuscation, or absence when you are all-powerful.
3. There is no evidence that Jesus ever lived. The earliest verifiable, non-forged mention of Jesus being in the pages of the bible 40 or more years after Jesus’ supposed existence. Also, various other entities in other religious belief systems before and during Jesus’ time had figures with almost identical attributes. Obviously myth.
4.Evolution, which is scientific fact, does not provide any evidence of any creature having spontaneously arisen as asserted in the bible. Each life form being related to each other by some previous common ancestor. Be it fish, bug, or bacteria.
5.Prophecies outlined in the bible were all written after the fact.
6.Prayer has been proven no more effective than a placebo. What happens after a prayer is made depends on what action an individual makes, and what was going to happen all along without the prayer.
7.The Jewish people are said to be the favored people of god. If this is so then I would hate to be on his hate list.
8.God kills the innocents. Babies, children, mothers, innocent men and woman. He commands rape, murder, and robbery. How can this god be described as loving? When a murderer, rapist, or thief turns over a new leaf while in prison, do we open the doors of the jail cell?
9.Biblical text is so unnecessarily vague that it can be utilized by the most nefarious among us to manipulate individuals into doing his/her bidding.
…. and many more.
dw says:
September 29, 2009 at 10:41 am
… And your evidence for a god must follow:
DW, thanks for posting,
It seems like most of your points are why you don’t think the God of the Bible is God. Let’s just back up for a minute if you would. My intent was that you present any reasonable evidence that there is no God in a little more broad terms first of all. Then we can move on to the truth that that God is the God of the Bible. (I will address your points you have already made and present the evidence for God’s existence.)
Thanks again,
BTW I wasn’t sure how to reply in the area of original discussion. There was no “reply” to click on.
Do not use scripture to do so. Scripture is of no value whatsoever to an atheist unless it is used to prove how ridiculous it is.
There is no way to prove there is no entity whatsoever. It can be confidently stated that all the gods from all the religions of man do not exist. All are creations of human beings. God did not create man, man created god.
If you want to believe in a prime mover, a force that intitiated the Universe, be my guest. A friend of mine thinks there is some underlying force in the Universe which initiated the creation of the Universe.
P. S. The major religions are almost all based on the Jewish Abrahamic belief system. This includes the Christian, Islamic, and Judaic belief systems.
With some paganism sprinkled on top…
DW
You don’t have to prove that no God exists, that’s impossible. But in broader terms, not referring to your rejection of a particular “religious” belief or system. What is your reasoning (conclusion based on factual evidence) that there is no God or Creator or Designer behind all of the universe.
Thanks
Provide an operational definition of this gawd fellow, would you?
You are correct, I don’t have to prove a negative. You are making a positive claim and that is the claim that needs to be proven.
I have already given you much about why there is no god, at least none which is associated with any of the existing religions. Plese refer to my earlier reasons for god’s non-existence, at least any god which takes an interest in mankind.
A positive is supposed to be easy to prove. Yours should be an easy task. Why isn’t it? Maybe it’s because it is a claim not based on reason, but on blind faith. Maybe because there is no evidence.
I hate to interrupt, but I think DW’s saying there IS NO GOD. Get that straight – atheists don’t believe in a gawd, PERIOD. Stop acting as if we’re just in denial.
DW
(I tried to be as succinct as I could. Sorry they’re not in numerical order but I think you’ll be able to follow)
In addressing your points, evidence will be given for the existence of God.
( Reasoning- making a conclusion or inference based on factual evidence)
#4) Evolution
-Attempting to explain origins scientifically through evolution is reasonable.
-Science by definition must be repeatable, observable, testable or falsifiable. Therefore one time only historical events fall outside the scientific method.
-It is true that spontaneous generation does not occur in nature yet the evolutionist must affirm that at some point in history spontaneous generation has occurred because the theory apparently allows for no supernatural aid (which by definition is not spontaneous).
-Science has never observed macroevolution and there is no indication of such occurring in the fossil record. There is no evidence of transitional forms. An evolutionist is only observing microevolution (natural selection).
An evolutionist is exercising faith when he affirms evolution as a means of origination of life.
By the same token, a creationist cannot prove creation scientifically either, because creation is not observable, repeatable, etc.
-In confirming that evolution is not a reasonable option, we then take into account what can be scientifically verified as we observe the world around us. Design is evidenced everywhere. (Which fits squarely with the Bibles accounts of a creator God). Two brief examples: a) irreducible complexity, which says that the “machinery” of a single cell which carries out the functions of life for that cell are irreducibly complex which means the parts of the cell needed for life cannot be any more simple or life could not exist. This “machinery” is extremely complex. Therefore even a single living cell could not have arisen spontaneously. b) Genetic information in living organisms. There can’t be one (life) without the other (information). Evidence of a designer (God), outside of the material world, implanting vast amounts of information into genes. These are very sound and reasonable evidences pointing to God.
#3)
Scripture (the Bible) meets all three tests of historical reliability
1) Biographical Test (verification that the text was transmitted accurately)
2) Internal Evidence (Is it credible? and to what extent?) –ascertaining the ability of the writer or the witness to tell the truth.
3) External test (does other historical material confirm or deny the internal testimony of the documents themselves).
How does one know if a person in history actually existed. For example Julius Caesar or George Washington…..by reliable historic evidence.
Jesus was a real historical figure. Referring to the external test mentioned previously there are two extra Biblical sources mentioning Jesus and events surrounding His life.
a) Jewish Historian Josephus referred to Jesus at least twice in his “Antiquities of the Jews” around A.D. 93 as well as Cornelius Tacitus around A.D. 112.
Most of the alleged parallels between Christianity and mystery religions,upon close scrutiny, will show that Christian elements predate mythological elements. In cases were they do not it is often Jewish elements which predate both Christianity and the myth, and which lent themselves to both religions.
#1)
Miracle- An event that seems impossible to explain by natural laws and is so regarded as supernatural in origin or as an act of God.
Miracles are witnessed and attested to throughout scripture. The Bible claims to be of supernatural origins. Miracles attested to by not only individual witnesses but by crowds of witnesses as well. Ex. Over 500 witnesses at one time saw the resurrected Jesus. Here again one time only events in history cannot be verified scientifically but must be verified historically by reliable eyewitness accounts, documentation, etc.
#5)
Detailed prophecies are fulfilled in scripture. Ex. Isaiah 700 B.C. named Cyrus as king 160 years before the fact. Daniel prophesied to the day that Jesus would enter Jerusalem.
As well as numerous messianic prophecies. Biblical texts have been verified as reliable historical documents.
#6)
This is an unreasonable statement. How has prayer been disproven? It is verifiable by scriptural testimony along with historical occurrences. Scripture tells us that God does not choose to answer every prayer. Also attempting to verify such a thing would be to test God, in that, a person praying for a particular thing only to get God to do his will, to say” look it works” is not genuine prayer but sin. It would make the Creator no more than a cosmic genie doing the bidding of humans.
#2)
God has not been silent in his declaration of Himself. The heavens declare the glory of God (His power, majesty and beauty). He has revealed Himself to us in creation, conscience, the Bible and ultimately in His son Jesus Christ. “Who is the express image of God”. God in the flesh. If these evidences are rejected, it follows that one would come to a faulty conclusion on the issue. (Ask yourself what it would take for you to be convinced……maybe a person rising from the dead?)
#7)
The Jewish people are God’s chosen people, through whom the Christ would come to bless all families of the earth with salvation. Yes, Jews have been through a lot in history. This is another validation of scriptural truth (judgments pronounced on Israel). God is holy and just and judges sin. Israel is judged because of their sin, in order that they may repent and turn to God. Sin is an offense to God’s holy character and ruinous to the lives of people. Chastening of His people is a most loving act. (God chastens those He loves)
#8)
I assume you are referring to instances in scripture where God commands Israel to destroy entire cities, leaving no one alive and taking the wealth of the city. These accounts are of God’s judgment on those nations for their sins. God is not only loving (allowing years and years for the nations to repent) but righteous and just (fair and impartial in dealing with sin) and He must judge sin. He cannot deny His own character.
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being. All life is from God and is God’s own possession, therefore He has the right to give and take it as he chooses. (This is not murder) To steal (theft) is to take the property of another without right or permission. Likewise all things are created by God , therefore all things are His to give and take as He chooses. Rape ?????? I don’t know what you are referring to here…
#9)
The entire theme of the Bible is the salvation of mankind (restoration of man to a right relationship to God through the person and work of Jesus Christ). ……Vague?????…..In the beginning God created…. God created man in His own image….your sins have separated you from your God…..(man) is (spiritually) dead in trespasses and sin…..the wages of sin is death….all have sinned and come short of God’s (perfect standard)…..the Word was God…the Word became flesh and dwelt among us…..repent and believe on the Lord Jesus (the Word) and you will be saved…….These are simple, clear statements from scripture.
These are very reasonable evidences that there is a God and that God is the God of the Bible. The Christian faith is a reasonable faith.
Also regarding your most recent post. You reject the validity of scripture.
(BTW This is a false conclusion.) Short example, lets assume that you were born in New York City. You told a friend and he asked you,”How do you know?”
What would you tell Him? Could you prove it scientifically? No, of course not? (one time event) You would say, “look, here is my birth certificate, filled out, (“see, City of New york”) and signed by reliable witnesses, a doctor, etc. or “my mother told me that I was born there”, another reliable witness. Any number of things could point to your birth in New York City. But it is not scientifically verifiable. When you reject scripture, its the same as rejecting your birth certificate, the testimony of reliable witnesses, etc., to prove your birth place.
We have been given the truth, yet you choose to reject it. Is that reasonable?
Thanks for your time.
These are all lies. Complete bullshit.
Modern scholarship maintains that the ‘scriptures’ were written well past the alleged lifetimes of the alleged authors.
Wait – what? You need to provide a detailed list of these ’500′ witnesses. Names, jobs, reliability. You know, like in a court of law.
Surprising then, that there was no intervention during the holocaust. Nobody showed.
Known as psychosis.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Wow, that’s ridiculous. Prayer never works. Can you reproduce it in a lab? Nope.
Wow – you have NEVER ever examined your book of fables w/a critical eye. NOT ONE PROPHECY EVER CAME TRUE. Not 1.
That’s fucking retarded. Now if you claimed that you were born on Jupiter’s moon Io, that you have gills hidden on your neck, & you receive transmissions from the mother ship from time to time, there’s going to be a demand for proof.
Yeah, just keep smoking that theological crack, dude. Way easier than reality.
Talk about bullshit….
“1) Biographical Test (verification that the text was transmitted accurately)
2) Internal Evidence (Is it credible? and to what extent?) –ascertaining the ability of the writer or the witness to tell the truth.
3) External test (does other historical material confirm or deny the internal testimony of the documents themselves).”
The first two points are unquestionably incorrect by any reasonable standard of truth. The third is based upon extremely specious evidence, to say the least.
It’s incredible how completely delusional or galactically stupid some people are (it’s often hard to tell which is the culprit). You’ve simply injected unmitigated bullshit into the format of a reasonable argument. I’m sure someone with the intellect of a sheep will find your argument compelling, but anyone smarter than the average farm animal knows you’re either stupid or dishonest.
-Science has never observed macroevolution and there is no indication of such occurring in the fossil record. There is no evidence of transitional forms. An evolutionist is only observing microevolution (natural selection).
An evolutionist is exercising faith when he affirms evolution as a means of origination of life.
By the same token, a creationist cannot prove creation scientifically either, because creation is not observable, repeatable, etc.
-In confirming that evolution is not a reasonable option, we then take into account what can be scientifically verified as we observe the world around us. Design is evidenced everywhere. (Which fits squarely with the Bibles accounts of a creator God). Two brief examples: a) irreducible complexity, which says that the “machinery” of a single cell which carries out the functions of life for that cell are irreducibly complex which means the parts of the cell needed for life cannot be any more simple or life could not exist. This “machinery” is extremely complex. Therefore even a single living cell could not have arisen spontaneously. b) Genetic information in living organisms. There can’t be one (life) without the other (information). Evidence of a designer (God), outside of the material world, implanting vast amounts of information into genes. These are very sound and reasonable evidences pointing to God.
Tregg,
reading what you’ve written about evolution, creation, and ID you sound comlpetely ignorant… 1st every fossil is a transitional form. 2nd, irreducible complexity, I uggest you take a look into the Dover PA ID case, design is evidenced NOWHERE and the fact that you sugest it makes me sick.. 3rd, your claim of spontaneous generation… What the hell is ID then? The only “faith” here is yours in god. Faith is lack of evidence and there is very difinitive evidences for the origin of life however, nothing you’ve blathered about above is any kind of evidence for god…
YES!YES!YES! This would be more than sufficient evidence for me. May I volunteer my brother David? Please bring him back. I miss him so. If your imaginary friend can bring my brother back, I’ll fall to my knees and wership (intentional mispelling). I’ll pray and wear a burka, I’ll eat crackers and wine everyday, I’ll never fuck except to make a baby. These I promise as soon as I hear David’s voice again; when I feel his WARM skin on my hand; when he hugs me again. Then I’ll wership your gawd.
Not till then though. K?
Cry4turtles
I’m sorry to hear about your brother. Death is a terrible part of our human existence.
Sin has brought death into our experience as humans. ….just as through one man (Adam) sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because all sinned…through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act (God in Jesus Christ living and dying in the place of sinful men), the free gift (eternal life through Jesus christ) came to all men…..
The purpose of God raising people from the dead was to validate the message of Jesus…..Christ said, “if you don’t believe me because of the words I speak, then believe me because of the works that I do….(because they are obviously of Divine origin.)
Again, sorry for the loss of your brother.
BTW God loves You
Zeus? Ra? Thor? Which gawd? I figured out that your gawd doesn’t like girls when I was 5. I prefer Thor anyway. Now there’s a looker.
Get a fucking clue tregg.. Have you ever even tried to read a book.? including the bible?
Tregg – you’re officially moderated. No more preaching. Goodbye.
Atheists need not a leader. Truth will reveal itself in the end. When that truth comes, it will be more persuasive than what some politician or windbag could say.