First issue that I have is your disrespect for what I believe in by calling Jesus a zombie proves a small instance of societal intolerance functionally displayed by many atheists out there. I don’t have a problem with what you believe, as everyone is free to do so, but don’t insult my religion.
With that said, themodynamics and Chaos theory are conjunctionary in the concept of matter evolving out of nothing into an exisistence in which itself is a solitary self multiplying organism. What you can argue, IF you can prove it, is that a dimension from contigent occurance created our universe in a foray of violent explosion which would be refered to as the 10th dimmension. Thusly, out of the 10th dimmension the theory of Chaos can be continued creating a new world.
THAT is an absolute headache. This is all why something from nothing makes no sense to me and why I’d be a little more inclined to believe in a higher power. Even if that orgin seems mystic to some.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…the question remains: did Stalin kill all those people because he was an atheist, or because he was a megalomaniac who used communist ideology to usurp his power?[/quote]No, but his atheism (functional anyway) gave him no reason not to.[/quote]
…if that is a valid condemnation of atheism, every atrocity committed in the name of religion is a condemnation of that religion. But then you’ll just make excuses…[/quote]I shoulda known better because this leads right back into the moral relativity debate. Any atrocity I might commit would be in crystal clear violation of the Christian principles I say I believe and therefore a condemnation of myself rather than the belief system I claim to hold. Please allow me yet again: If there is no supra human court beyond which there is no appeal then all of existence is meaningless and one man’s atrocity is another man’s progressive social policy.
Indeed, evil itself is reduced to whatever is deemed unpleasant by somebody for the moment with “atrocity” being extra unpleasant with maybe a bit of spectacle thrown in. Of course this is dependent upon who’s perspective we’re talking about because to the one committing it it isn’t atrocious at all, but simply a means to an end unfortunate though he may even think it is.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
First issue that I have is your disrespect for what I believe in by calling Jesus a zombie proves a small instance of societal intolerance functionally displayed by many atheists out there. I don’t have a problem with what you believe, as everyone is free to do so, but don’t insult my religion.
With that said, themodynamics and Chaos theory are conjunctionary in the concept of matter evolving out of nothing into an exisistence in which itself is a solitary self multiplying organism. What you can argue, IF you can prove it, is that a dimension from contigent occurance created our universe in a foray of violent explosion which would be refered to as the 10th dimmension. Thusly, out of the 10th dimmension the theory of Chaos can be continued creating a new world.
THAT is an absolute headache. This is all why something from nothing makes no sense to me and why I’d be a little more inclined to believe in a higher power. Even if that orgin seems mystic to some.[/quote]
FrozenNinja, this is exactly what I was referring to my original post in this thread. Atheists see religion as an idea while you see it as part of yourself. This is why you’re offended. The zombie comments are in jest.
I applaud you for taking a scientific approach to this, but I find it ironic that you denounce some people here for their belief in how life started (through logic, science, and reason) while at the same time, are offended of posters insulting a man that has no historical evidence of existence (Jesus).
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
So my question for YOU is: Do most atheists believe in the Big Bang theory and Evolution to assusage their denial of a Diety presence?[/quote]
Atheism is a denial of the religious persons assertion that a God exists based on the lack of evidence they present. Nothing more. Atheism is NOT a belief system in itself.
There are many Atheists who believe different things (just like Christians).[/quote]
You’re wrong.
You’re conflating atheism with skeptical agnosticism.
Atheism is the positive assertion that there is no God/gods/diety. It is not the “default” position of non-believers. Atheism is very much a belief system in itself, with its own metaphysical assertions.
It is also far from anti-religious, atheism itself being being very much a religion (yes there are different brands of atheists).
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
The Big Bang theory also ignores the First law of Thermodynamics, which says:
“matter cannot be created or destroyed”
[/quote]
No, it does not state this. Not at all. If what you said was true atomic bombs would not exist. Matter can be converted to energy, it is not always conserved and thermo doesnâ??t say that it has to be.
No, it does not state this. Not at all.
The second law deals with entropy of reacting system. It essentially states that microscopic disorder tends to increase through natural process. This is not the same thing as the â??order of the universeâ?? in the sense that you are using the term.
No, it does not state this. Not at all.
No, no, no. A singularity cannot be described as a â??small dotâ?? giving it any spatial dimensions invalidates the concept.
And no, it is obvious you donâ??t understand the concept of â??spinâ?? in association with singularities, so you shouldnâ??t comment on it. It is not the classical idea of a spinning ball you apparently think it is. (once again the problem with assigning spacial dimentions. A singularity, collapsed to a size of 0 cannot even spin the way you are talking. A singularity â??spinsâ?? in the sense that it drags space-time circularly around it.
It doesnâ??t attempt to answer this, at least the actual science doesnâ??t. Idiots may claim things though.
That is one of the fundamental assumptions of the theory. It admits it doesnâ??t prove this up front.
Okay, this â??spinningâ?? thing has gotten laughable. You donâ??t know anything about it. And even if they way you thought of a spinning singularity were true, they would not all have to spin the same direction. You have no idea how conservation of momentum works. Total momentum in the system would be conserved classically, But even that wouldnâ??t categorically state that everything would have to spin the same way. And even if that did, we are talking angular momentum and the center of the universe, which would only dictate spin in relation to the center of the universe. All of that of coarse ignores the fact it is not a classical system and there are multiple energy sources affecting and changing the system.
You gave me a good laugh. ANYWAYS, Because of the way physics work, and the discontinuity to anything before the big bang because of the singularity containing all the mass of the universe, it makes sense to refer to that as the beginning of both time and space. There is no physical or time connection to anything before it. The time and universe we live in essentially started with the big bang.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
So my question for YOU is: Do most atheists believe in the Big Bang theory and Evolution to assusage their denial of a Diety presence?[/quote]
Atheism is a denial of the religious persons assertion that a God exists based on the lack of evidence they present. Nothing more. Atheism is NOT a belief system in itself.
There are many Atheists who believe different things (just like Christians).[/quote]
You’re wrong.
You’re conflating atheism with skeptical agnosticism.
Atheism is the positive assertion that there is no God/gods/diety. It is not the “default” position of non-believers. Atheism is very much a belief system in itself, with it’s own metaphysical assertions.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but you are incorrect. See the Atheist Experience show on youtube for proper definition of Atheism. They (along with other Atheist groups) even explain how most definitions online are incorrect and need updating.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
So my question for YOU is: Do most atheists believe in the Big Bang theory and Evolution to assusage their denial of a Diety presence?[/quote]
Atheism is a denial of the religious persons assertion that a God exists based on the lack of evidence they present. Nothing more. Atheism is NOT a belief system in itself.
There are many Atheists who believe different things (just like Christians).[/quote]
You’re wrong.
You’re conflating atheism with skeptical agnosticism.
Atheism is the positive assertion that there is no God/gods/diety. It is not the “default” position of non-believers. Atheism is very much a belief system in itself, with it’s own metaphysical assertions.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but you are incorrect. See the Atheist Experience show on youtube for proper definition of Atheism. They (along with other Atheist groups) even explain how most definitions online are incorrect and need updating.
[/quote]
I’m good. I don’t need to watch You Tube to gain an understanding of the English language. Atheism is a word and has a meaning. I’m not interested in an argument around semantics.
If you don’t positively assert that there is no god, then you’re not an atheist. It is not a liquid term. If you do positively assert that there is no god, you are making a statement of faith: a religious statement.
Edit: please stop trying to destroy the English language by making words meaningless or insisting they mean whatever you’d like them to mean.
@DoubleDeuce: To give you a rebutal to this, the above information you “seemed” to systematically refute is information I found interesting. So sufice to say this was information thrown in to stir the pot if you will. None of it was typed by me, but found online from various sources. Gets your mind thinking though.
And honestly, to prove or disprove the big bang, it doesnt change the fact that you have to re-examine thermodynamics, Polonium halos, theory of chaos along with many other scientific inconsistances that make the big bang just as laughable to me as Christianity is to someone else.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
So my question for YOU is: Do most atheists believe in the Big Bang theory and Evolution to assusage their denial of a Diety presence?[/quote]
Atheism is a denial of the religious persons assertion that a God exists based on the lack of evidence they present. Nothing more. Atheism is NOT a belief system in itself.
There are many Atheists who believe different things (just like Christians).[/quote]
You’re wrong.
You’re conflating atheism with skeptical agnosticism.
Atheism is the positive assertion that there is no God/gods/diety. It is not the “default” position of non-believers. Atheism is very much a belief system in itself, with it’s own metaphysical assertions.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but you are incorrect. See the Atheist Experience show on youtube for proper definition of Atheism. They (along with other Atheist groups) even explain how most definitions online are incorrect and need updating.
[/quote]
I’m good. I don’t need to watch You Tube to gain an understanding of the English language. Atheism is a word and has a meaning. I’m not interested in an argument around semantics.
If you don’t positively assert that there is no god, then you’re not an atheist. It is not a liquid term. If you do positively assert that there is no god, you are making a statement of faith: a religious statement.
Edit: please stop trying to destroy the English language by making words meaningless or insisting they mean whatever you’d like them to mean.[/quote]
Whoa whoa whoa! Easy there! This isn’t an argument of semantics. It’s a DISCUSSION of the correct definition of a word that’s being misused as something it’s not.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
So to cliff note the above, which was info I found interesting, research the following:
Evidence of Polonium Halos (this is a big arguement)
The Theory of Thermodynamics
The Theory of Chaos
The Big Bang Theory seriously messes with these simple rules of science to a degree that frustrated me greatly. When I was 16 I set out to disprove the existence of God from my own personal research. I couldn’t. I think atheists are too quick to judge anyone who believes in any type of diety.
So roundabout way to answer your question, but the axiomatic structure of atheist belief leads to my incredulous nature.
So my question for YOU is: Do most atheists believe in the Big Bang theory and Evolution to assusage their denial of a Diety presence?[/quote]
@DoubleDeuce: Pay close attention to the above line. ITs info I found interesting. Its from various online sources. But excuse me for not explaining that better.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
So my question for YOU is: Do most atheists believe in the Big Bang theory and Evolution to assusage their denial of a Diety presence?[/quote]
Atheism is a denial of the religious persons assertion that a God exists based on the lack of evidence they present. Nothing more. Atheism is NOT a belief system in itself.
There are many Atheists who believe different things (just like Christians).[/quote]
You’re wrong.
You’re conflating atheism with skeptical agnosticism.
Atheism is the positive assertion that there is no God/gods/diety. It is not the “default” position of non-believers. Atheism is very much a belief system in itself, with it’s own metaphysical assertions.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but you are incorrect. See the Atheist Experience show on youtube for proper definition of Atheism. They (along with other Atheist groups) even explain how most definitions online are incorrect and need updating.
[/quote]
I’m good. I don’t need to watch You Tube to gain an understanding of the English language. Atheism is a word and has a meaning. I’m not interested in an argument around semantics.
If you don’t positively assert that there is no god, then you’re not an atheist. It is not a liquid term. If you do positively assert that there is no god, you are making a statement of faith: a religious statement.
Edit: please stop trying to destroy the English language by making words meaningless or insisting they mean whatever you’d like them to mean.[/quote]
Whoa whoa whoa! Easy there! This isn’t an argument of semantics. It’s a DISCUSSION of the correct definition of a word that’s being misused as something it’s not.
[/quote]
No it’s not. Professor you tube is wrong. He clearly understands neither the way English works as a language, nor the particular definition of Atheism.
His “Anti-Theism” example is a good demonstration of how clueless he is. Anti-theism would mean you don’t like gods/god/God or you don’t like the belief in God. It doesn’t really make sense, hence, it’s a made up word. (Christopher Hitchens uses it too).
Words are used incorrectly when they are used in speech as something they are not.
If I say “I eat run”, I’m using the word run incorrectly. It’s a verb and I’m trying to use it as an object.
If I say, “I like cats” when what I really meant to say is “I like dogs.” I haven’t used any words incorrectly, I’ve used the wrong the words.
Atheism is a belief in the fact that there is nothing in which to believe in. I think you can qualify that as a belief system. The ability to refuse belief of anything other than there is nothing of a God to believe in seems like a belief system to me.
Its simple manipulation of the English language. Its like asking some joe hey what do you believe in? And him saying “I believe that there is nothing to believe in as far as evidence of any higher power.”
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
Atheism is a belief in the fact that there is nothing in which to believe in. I think you can qualify that as a belief system. The ability to refuse belief of anything other than there is nothing of a God to believe in seems like a belief system to me.
Its simple manipulation of the English language. Its like asking some joe hey what do you believe in? And him saying “I believe that there is nothing to believe in as far as evidence of any higher power.” [/quote]
No. Atheism is the specific belief that there is no Theos (god/gods). It is very much a belief system, as you assert.
However, atheism does not assert that it’s unknowable. That would be a type of agnosticism (without knowledge).
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
So my question for YOU is: Do most atheists believe in the Big Bang theory and Evolution to assusage their denial of a Diety presence?[/quote]
Atheism is a denial of the religious persons assertion that a God exists based on the lack of evidence they present. Nothing more. Atheism is NOT a belief system in itself.
There are many Atheists who believe different things (just like Christians).[/quote]
You’re wrong.
You’re conflating atheism with skeptical agnosticism.
Atheism is the positive assertion that there is no God/gods/diety. It is not the “default” position of non-believers. Atheism is very much a belief system in itself, with it’s own metaphysical assertions.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but you are incorrect. See the Atheist Experience show on youtube for proper definition of Atheism. They (along with other Atheist groups) even explain how most definitions online are incorrect and need updating.
[/quote]
I’m good. I don’t need to watch You Tube to gain an understanding of the English language. Atheism is a word and has a meaning. I’m not interested in an argument around semantics.
If you don’t positively assert that there is no god, then you’re not an atheist. It is not a liquid term. If you do positively assert that there is no god, you are making a statement of faith: a religious statement.
Edit: please stop trying to destroy the English language by making words meaningless or insisting they mean whatever you’d like them to mean.[/quote]
Whoa whoa whoa! Easy there! This isn’t an argument of semantics. It’s a DISCUSSION of the correct definition of a word that’s being misused as something it’s not.
[/quote]
No it’s not. Professor you tube is wrong. He clearly understands neither the way English works as a language, nor the particular definition of Atheism.
His “Anti-Theism” example is a good demonstration of how clueless he is. Anti-theism would mean you don’t like gods/god/God or you don’t like the belief in God. It doesn’t really make sense, hence, it’s a made up word. (Christopher Hitchens uses it too).[/quote]
Spartiates, you are not a expert on this subject. “Professor You Tube” or Matt Dillahunty (as his correct name is) has been hosting the Atheist Experience for many many years now and has corrected this definition many times.
Here is a definition from a very reliable ATHEIST SOURCE:
“An atheist is a person who does not believe in any gods. Atheism is the corresponding philosophical position. This commonly used definition does not assume any positive claim of the nonexistence of a god.”
Source: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Atheist
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
First issue that I have is your disrespect for what I believe in by calling Jesus a zombie proves a small instance of societal intolerance functionally displayed by many atheists out there. I don’t have a problem with what you believe, as everyone is free to do so, but don’t insult my religion.
With that said, themodynamics and Chaos theory are conjunctionary in the concept of matter evolving out of nothing into an exisistence in which itself is a solitary self multiplying organism. What you can argue, IF you can prove it, is that a dimension from contigent occurance created our universe in a foray of violent explosion which would be refered to as the 10th dimmension. Thusly, out of the 10th dimmension the theory of Chaos can be continued creating a new world.
THAT is an absolute headache. This is all why something from nothing makes no sense to me and why I’d be a little more inclined to believe in a higher power. Even if that orgin seems mystic to some.[/quote]
FrozenNinja, this is exactly what I was referring to my original post in this thread. Atheists see religion as an idea while you see it as part of yourself. This is why you’re offended. The zombie comments are in jest.
I applaud you for taking a scientific approach to this, but I find it ironic that you denounce some people here for their belief in how life started (through logic, science, and reason) while at the same time, are offended of posters insulting a man that has no historical evidence of existence (Jesus).[/quote]
Ok, I don’t have time to extract TONS of information to prove of Christ’s exsistence, but trust me, it’s out there. And as being offended, I’m trying really hard to make it a buisness of not putting down anyone for what they believe but rather throwing things in the mix to get people’s minds working. The way I see it, athiests should view their atheism as apart of themselves as well, because in the end it defines their own concept of how life starts and how life ends. (Which gives whole new meaning to the thought of where you go when you die)
Unless you guys provide sources to what you are saying in regards to the definitions of Atheism (proper sources, not yahoo answers), then you will not be taken seriously.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…the question remains: did Stalin kill all those people because he was an atheist, or because he was a megalomaniac who used communist ideology to usurp his power?[/quote]
Both. He wasn’t just atheist, he fucking hated everything to do with religion. There were no shortage of people murdered because they were religious. I can look it up for you, but I prefer you do the leg work. I got a big squat day ahead of me. …Get it?![/quote]
…religion was a threat to his totalitarian regime, and any threat was crushed. He didn’t hate religion because he was an atheist; he hated religion because it was a threat. Ideology fuels zeal, and zeal inspires people to do [horrific] things. A simple lack of beliefs in a deity in- and of itself isn’t empowering you, it liberates you…
[/quote]
He hated religion because of his mother if I am not mistaken. She made him go to church and the seminary which he hated and resented.
Yes, it was personal for him…I wish I could find some links that aren’t a thousand pages of boring text. But do us all a favor and don’t try to soften his utter assholeness. He made hitler look like an alter boy.
The picture is on the Cathedral of Christ Savior which he lovingly detonated. Sadly, even some Christians agreed with this move of his though…
Lots of stuff going on here. I’ll take this piece by piece.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
“For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who don’t believe, no explanation is possible.”
I think atheists need to develop a better track record in history. Many atheists I know spew such hatred for any type of religion that it’s hard for me to imagine putting someone in office who has such religous intolerance. Now there are exceptions to that but from what i’ve seen and heard thats the general consensus. I haven’t met an atheist who didn’t absolutely hate one religion or another or all.[/quote]
Religion and God are two different and, IMO, separate things. Religions are just bureaucracies created by humans that interfere with finding the truth. And they always ask for money. Yes, I think most religions are complete bullshit. That doesn’t stop me from trying to find evidence of God.
Near death experiences typically happen before someone loses vital signs. They have been explained as the brain producing massive amounts of “feel good” brain chemicals, most likely in response to the stress that the body is undergoing moments before clinical death. it ain’t a miracle; it’s neurotransmitters.
The following people consider themselves agnostics and yet have contributed a great deal of money to name a few:
Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Lance Armstrong.
Don’t you think we would have come up with these rules on our own? Humans by nature live in societies. In order for societies to run effectively, there needs to be a code of conduct or system of laws. Most, if not all, religions were created in order to create this system of laws.
[quote]But ultimately, IMO, being a Christian and adhering to THAT moral code, is one of the hardest things you can do in your life. Especially if your trying to adhere to the principals of the 10 Commandments.
Its much easier to have sex before marriage than not. (Fornication)
Its much easier to screw your best friends hot wife than not. (honor and love your neighbor/adultry)
ITs much easier to steal what you want than work hard and pay for it. (Stealing/theft/theivry)
Its much easier to kill for your own lust,gratification,gain or other arbitrary reason. (Murder)
and on and on.[/quote]
Which is why we have laws prohibiting these crimes. More importantly, however, most people realize, as I’ve mentioned, that living in a society requires order. Most people also realize that what goes around comes around. I choose not to steal from you because I don’t want you to steal from me. It’s common sense. If others agree to this principle, we now have a society with no stealing. There is order, and everyone can be fairly confident that what they produce with their own hard work is theirs to keep. If someone breaks this rule, we have a system that removes that person from society. No Sky Wizard required.
Ironically, most people in prison claim to be part of a religion and many were raised in Christianity.
[quote]Take it or leave it, but I much rather give props to someone who lives by that moral code. I respect the guy who waits until marriage more than the Hugh Hefner type. Any man can do wrong, but it takes a truly strong person to do what is right. No matter what you believe or don’t believe in.
So give me an atheist who doesn’t hate the world for believing, and has solid moral foundation and views, and that is someone I might endorse. And don’t give me that crap that theres plenty of them out there because history and majority prove that wrong to me everyday.[/quote]
I’m one of these people you seek (although I’m more of an agnostic than an atheist). Been married for almost 20 years now, never cheated, wasn’t much of a “playa” when I was single. I’m a good husband and father (not just my opinion, I’ve been told this by several people), I’ve never stolen anything, I don’t use drugs, and I don’t drink to excess (hardly at all anymore). And yes, there are plenty out there. As for your statement, “and don’t give me that crap that theres plenty of them out there because history and majority prove that wrong to me everyday,” I can say the same thing about religious persons. History and experience have shown me that most religious people are hypocrites and having faith does NOT guarantee moral behavior. Here is a short list of religious people who have been less than Christ-like:
Jim and Tammy Fay Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Haggard, (IMO, all televangelists are corrupt, so I would add Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, although technically they never did anything wrong), the 100 or so Catholic priests who sexually molested children.
