Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Apr 25, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Psychology Today

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Comments (Page 550)

Showing posts 10,981 - 11,000 of21,342
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11675
Jan 31, 2013
 

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11676
Jan 31, 2013
 

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11677
Jan 31, 2013
 

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11678
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not religion that holds science back, but the gross limitations of its own pedestrian thought.
Religion gives mankind hope.
Do you care to try to defend that? How does science hold science back?

What kind of hope does religion give mankind, and what is its value?

It is no defense of superstition and pseudoscience to say that it brings solace and comfort to people ... If solace and comfort are how we judge the worth of something, then consider that tobacco brings solace and comfort to smokers; alcohol brings it to drinkers; drugs of all kinds bring it to addicts; the fall of cards and the run of horses bring it to gamblers; cruelty and violence bring it to sociopaths. Judge by solace and comfort only and there is no behaviour we ought to interfere with.- Isaac Asimov

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11680
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>Who or what is "God"? If you can't define it, you can't very well expect others to take seriously your claim that it exists.
Main Entry: 1god
Pronunciation:\ˈgäd also ˈgȯd\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German got god
Date: before 12th century
1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind 2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship ; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality 3 : a person or thing of supreme value 4 : a powerful ruler

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11681
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

insidesecrets wrote:
Atheists never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for power and self gain (ergo communism).
Thanks. I'll try to remember not to become a Communist.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11682
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

2

KittenKoder wrote:
I'm the atheist, therefore I choose what it means
Atta girl! We don't let our enemies and detractors define us. We define ourselves.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11683
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

3

In science there is a Law of Physics called the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. Within it is a Conservation of Energy Law that states, as a key principle that all energy in a closed system must be conserved. Okay, fancy language, but what does that mean? It means that while energy can convert into matter (physical “stuff”), and matter into energy, however much total “stuff” there is (matter and energy), there can never be an increase in that total amount or a decrease in that total amount. So however much total “stuff” there is in the universe,(matter and energy combined), there can never have been more and never have been less. All it can do is convert to different forms, like matter to energy or energy to matter, but the total amount of all of it has to remain the same.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11684
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

2

2

The “closed system” is a scientific term that refers to a system or an “area” that has no outside influence, like the universe. Now, as believers we know, of course, that God does influence the universe, so many believers would consider the universe an “open system”, (one that does get outside influence), but for the atheist who says there is no God, the universe is all there is, so from their perspective and for the sake of conventional science, the universe would get no outside influence and would therefore be considered a “closed system”.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11685
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

Back to the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. If it states that you can never have an increase or decrease of energy/matter, which means that matter/energy can not be created from nothingness, how did we get all the matter and energy in the universe? If science is all there is and there is no God, then the 1st Law of Thermodynamics reigns supreme and therefore it would be impossible to have matter and energy in existence right now. Simply put, when you open your eyes and see matter and experience energy, what you see is impossible according to the known Laws of science if, in fact, there is no God. Therefore, science itself says there must be a God.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11686
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

2

2

Plain and simple, matter/energy can not come into existence. It is scientifically impossible, yet here we see everything around us, so how can that be? There are really only 3 possibilities. Option A: Everything came into existence by itself anyway, without the help of God,(even though science has proven that impossible). Option B: Everything in the universe has always existed for all of eternity,(which, by the way is also scientifically impossible as explained in the Top Ten Proofs for God's Existence CD due to something called the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics), or Option C: There must be a God, a Being greater than science, who created the Laws of science and has the ability to disobey them. Not only is a belief in God the only logical conclusion to draw, it's the only one scientifically possible because remember, if there is no God, the first two options are scientifically impossible according to the actual Laws of Physics.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11687
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Believe it or not, a 5 year old child could be an atheistic scientist's worst nightmare by merely asking him “where did everything come from if God didn't make it?” What that child is actually asking in scientific terms is “how do we have a violation of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics by the creation of energy and matter in the closed system of the universe if there is no Creator capable of doing that?”

Many times people who do not believe there is evidence of God have claimed that a faith in God is only a matter of faith and that it can not be proven scientifically. They say "does God exist ?....if so, prove it to me". When confronted with this, we must fully understand what it means to “prove” something. The fact is that none of us were there when the universe came into being, so technically, none of us can “prove” what happened. We can't “prove” God did it and the atheists can't “prove” everything came into being on it's own, so what we have to do is examine the evidence based on science to determine the most plausible explanation. For example, if I see a beautiful sand castle on the beach with intricate design, but no one there along with it, I can not “prove” someone made it, just as someone else can not “prove” the sand castle made itself from the wind, waves and sand randomly interacting with one another, so we have to determine what logic and reason tell us is the most plausible explanation, based on scientific evidence and examination. You can get over an hour of scientific, mathemetical and logical evidence for God in the <Top Ten Proofs for God's Existence.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11688
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

insidesecrets wrote:
God is a metaphor for that which transcends all levels of intelletual thought and religons the touchstones of our "sensed" divinity expressed.
That's different. I thought that you were talking about a personality with a will and instructions for man. You're just talking about a common psychological experience.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11689
Jan 31, 2013
 
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop Gish Galloping and write a coherent post with your best evidence.
At least it's one small step from MUG's cut & paste rubbish. Though no better. MUG NEVER answered any questions, I for one on here don't expect this poster "Writing a coherent post with its best evidence." Did I, or did I not, read somewhere a post stating repeats were not going to be presented?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11690
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

scaritual wrote:
Why is it that theists have such a hard time copying and pasting links, and further, why do they have problems copying and pasting links that are crappy, too?
And why respond to a bare link? One of three things happens when you comment on such a piece.

[1] "That's not the part I was referring to" or "That's not the reason I posted it."

[2] "I didn't say that" or "That's not what I meant."

[3] Or, you find out that the poster didn't understand the link himself.

For those reasons, I require the poster to make an affirmative statement of his own, and defend that with a link if he likes.

But not just a bare link, which is too often a waste of time.
Glenn

Roseland, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11691
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Yes it will cease because Jesus will reign. No evil thoughts and principles like these will triumph at the end. GOd will reign, not atheism because atheism does not really exist. It's man's effort to remove God so they can do what they want.

Mice will play when the cat is away

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11692
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

01Justsayin wrote:
Atheism tends to exalt reason, but it is actually irrational. Atheists tend to put a lot of stock in the emperical method and in logic. One cannot disprove God exists using the emperical method. You might reply: But I can't disprove a giant purple frog on Mars controls the universe, either. Granted, one can never disprove any given thing exists. The atheistic position denying God's existence, if based on the emperical method, is absurd. Why do I say that? In order to prove the assertion No God exists experimentally, one would need to comprehensively know all of reality. Comprehensive knowledge of reality is called omniscience. One would need to be omniscient in order to prove there is no God, but if one were omniscient one would, by definition, already be God! So, based on emperical methodology, the only one capable of disproving the existence of God would be God himself! But some would say you can indeed assert something does not exist if its existence is logically self contradictory, such as a square triangle. By definition it cannot exist. It is illogical for something to be a square and to also be a triangle. Again, granted, but this line of reasoning assumes logic and real meaning exist and are our basis for knowledge --something an atheist has no right to assert! The existence of God is not only logically possible, it is philosophically essential. One cannot prove logic exists unless one first presupposes a God in whom reason and meaning are transcendentally rooted, otherwise these categories are mere philosphical prejuduces. Atheism is inherently self-contradictory. The evidence for the existence of God is there for all to see, only we refuse to see it. King David wrote: The fool says in his heart there is no God.(Psalm 14:1) In other words, Atheism is irrational. Apart from God there is no basis for truth or ethics. For the sake of brevity, let's simply consider ethics.
And this is even worse than a bare link. It's the bare plagiarized content of such a link. The same objections apply that apply to the bare link, plus the deception and the theft of intellectual property.

“Fortes Fortuna Juvat, ”

Since: Dec 09

Wichita. Ks.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11693
Jan 31, 2013
 
01Justsayin wrote:
Where is the proof or evidence to support the "belief" that you have that there is no God?
Say what?

You want proof of something I do not believe in?

I do not believe in a god or gods.

It is better that the one making the claim has the burden of proof of that claim.
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism - The theory or BELIEF that God does not exist.(google it) There most certainly is scientific evidence that God is real. Look it up. I ain't doing your work for you. However there is NO SCIENTIFIC evidence to prove that God does not exist. It's not possible. You just can't do it. The mere BELIEF that God does not exist is a BELIEF within itself. Ergo you are a hypocrite.
Atheism means not theist.

I have looked up many claims of evidence of a god or gods but none have ever shown proof of evidence.
So what you are saying is the there is no such thing a (not believing) in something.

Your logic behind not believing is flawed.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11695
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Hedonist wrote:
Now you're plagerizing WordPress opinion pieces. Exactly how low will you stoop? And this one talks about ethics. Apparently you have none.
Stealing comes as effortlessly as lying for the Christians. They continually try to steal the US Constitution and science for Jesus, as when we hear how the founding fathers and many scientists are Christian. They even stole "Thou shalt not steal" from the Jews.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11696
Jan 31, 2013
 
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Main Entry: 1god
Pronunciation:\ˈgäd also ˈgȯd\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German got god
Date: before 12th century
1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind 2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship ; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality 3 : a 4 : a powerful ruler
A person or thing of supreme value? A powerful ruler? OK. I'll grant you that such a "God" has existed. But it didn't create much - maybe a dynasty or a pyramid.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 10,981 - 11,000 of21,342
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••