Why Atheism Will Replace Religion

Aug 27, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: News24

Please note that for this article "Atheism" also includes agnostics, deists, pagans, wiccans... in other words non-religious.

You will notice this is a statement of fact. And to be fact it is supported by evidence (see references below). Now you can have "faith" that this is not true, but by the very definition of faith, that is just wishful thinking.

Comments (Page 536)

Showing posts 10,701 - 10,720 of14,394
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Hello”

Since: Jan 13

London, GB

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11079
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
As a former atheist who discovered God through science and not religion, my understanding is that all searches for truth eventually converge regardless of the searcher or whether the truth is described mathematically or allegorically or in some other esoteric language that has not yet evolved.
Yes, I think that too.
Pity you decided to make it God though. That, to me, is a bit like those script writers who take the easy option towards the end by having it 'then I woke up ...and it was all a dream'

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11080
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Matt Road wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true.
It's an allegory of the big bang that God started things of with a shout. There's truth to be had in mythology (including some religion stories in that). Atheists are neither blind nor death to the wonder that is the universe, else you'd never have any atheist cosmologists, and you do have them.
I have an idea that science will find more and more in common with these types of idea; it's kinda like religion/mythology/philosophy is the idea and science makes hypothesis from them. Certainly possible (this obviously is merely personal conjecture) that civilisations previous reached a greater state of scientific knowledge than we realise and that's one reason for the uncanny similarities to be found between religious ideas and scientific. Brought down to us in such myths; but like Chinese Whispers.
Where is it written that "God started things of with a shout"?

One of my favorite myths is an Australian aboriginal myth that was passed down from generation to generation around campfires for presumably some 50,000 years since that's when science says the aboriginals first emigrated to Australia. The "myth" simply states that the first aboriginals, two men and a women, walked to Australia. Scientists mocked and ridiculed this "myth" as impossible because it didn't plug into anything they thought they knew and what they thought they knew didn't include knowledge of plate tectonics and continental drift.... Whoops.

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11081
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Matt Road wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I think that too.
Pity you decided to make it God though. That, to me, is a bit like those script writers who take the easy option towards the end by having it 'then I woke up ...and it was all a dream'
God is the First Cause. That's an inevitable scientific conclusion based on logic and deductive reasoning. Science does not ascribe anthropomorphic characteristics to this First Cause and I don't either.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11082
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Sorry but you can't assign deeds and attributes to a god until you have proven there is a god.
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>God is the First Cause. That's an inevitable scientific conclusion based on logic and deductive reasoning. Science does not ascribe anthropomorphic characteristics to this First Cause and I don't either.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11083
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

Busted Siro!

Lol!

So by all means show a link backing any of this up.
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>Where is it written that "God started things of with a shout"?

One of my favorite myths is an Australian aboriginal myth that was passed down from generation to generation around campfires for presumably some 50,000 years since that's when science says the aboriginals first emigrated to Australia. The "myth" simply states that the first aboriginals, two men and a women, walked to Australia. Scientists mocked and ridiculed this "myth" as impossible because it didn't plug into anything they thought they knew and what they thought they knew didn't include knowledge of plate tectonics and continental drift.... Whoops.
xianity is EVIL

Halifax, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11084
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
God is the First Cause. That's an inevitable scientific conclusion based on logic and deductive reasoning. Science does not ascribe anthropomorphic characteristics to this First Cause and I don't either.
so which one did it?

www.godchecker.com

or are they all inventions of primitive ancient minds?
Thinking

Hounslow, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11085
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Your mind is closed, blubber.
ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
God is the First Cause. That's an inevitable scientific conclusion based on logic and deductive reasoning. Science does not ascribe anthropomorphic characteristics to this First Cause and I don't either.

Since: May 11

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11086
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

ezdzit wrote:
<quoted text>
Sartre was so close; he almost nailed it.
The truth is that all men and women have the POTENTIAL to be prophets.
Most people are just lazy. They lack the curiosity and will to make the effort to "climb the mountain", i.e. evolve to higher states of consciousness. As Jesus said, "Many are called, few are chosen."
Sartre was smarter than all of us, eventually he would not be drawn on the subject of god, he considered it beneath him, like talking at length about used q-tips.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11087
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
Sartre was smarter than all of us, eventually he would not be drawn on the subject of god, he considered it beneath him, like talking at length about used q-tips.
Speak for yourself.

Sartre shifted in "The Transcendence of the Ego: An Existentialist Theory of Consciousness" to a take on human identity mostly consistent with Jesus, the Galilean carpenter.

He departs from Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" to Jesus' "I am." (John 8:58)

The "thought" is form, the existence "is".

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11088
May 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

So funny when you Christians deny your faith but then later defend it. Old man Dave humiliates himself in the same way.

How goes the diet?
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>Speak for yourself.

Sartre shifted in "The Transcendence of the Ego: An Existentialist Theory of Consciousness" to a take on human identity mostly consistent with Jesus, the Galilean carpenter.

He departs from Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" to Jesus' "I am." (John 8:58)

The "thought" is form, the existence "is".

Since: May 11

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11089
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Speak for yourself.
Sartre shifted in "The Transcendence of the Ego: An Existentialist Theory of Consciousness" to a take on human identity mostly consistent with Jesus, the Galilean carpenter.
He departs from Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" to Jesus' "I am." (John 8:58)
The "thought" is form, the existence "is".
...and existence EXISTS independently of THOUGHT. We do not sit around all day and consider the supply of oxygen on our planet and yet that oxygen is there, because we do not die.

Reality is not dependent upon thought and thoughts of god do not inject a god into reality, as a concept yes, as a reality, no.

Not talking about god would simply remove him/her/it as a concept, we do not know about god/gods unless we are told about them, god is an invention. Yet we breathe involuntarily without knowledge of oxygen.

When god is not talked or thought about, he simply goes to sit in the corner of the box and pets Schroedinger`s cat until he is needed.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11091
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
...and existence EXISTS independently of THOUGHT. We do not sit around all day and consider the supply of oxygen on our planet and yet that oxygen is there, because we do not die.
Reality is not dependent upon thought and thoughts of god do not inject a god into reality, as a concept yes, as a reality, no.
Not talking about god would simply remove him/her/it as a concept, we do not know about god/gods unless we are told about them, god is an invention. Yet we breathe involuntarily without knowledge of oxygen.
When god is not talked or thought about, he simply goes to sit in the corner of the box and pets Schroedinger`s cat until he is needed.
Yet the oxygen works in us, and in all life.

God is not the invention. The invention is the description, when formed, is encapsulated as concept or form, and limited.

"Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say,'Show us the Father'?" (John 14:9)

Since: May 11

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11092
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet the oxygen works in us, and in all life.
God is not the invention. The invention is the description, when formed, is encapsulated as concept or form, and limited.
"Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say,'Show us the Father'?" (John 14:9)
So god is limited by the description he is given? It`s our fault god is feeble because we don`t `big him up` enough?

He is mighty indeed alleluia. LMFAO

So many followers of Zeus these days...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11093
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
So god is limited by the description he is given? It`s our fault god is feeble because we don`t `big him up` enough?
He is mighty indeed alleluia. LMFAO
So many followers of Zeus these days...
It is unseemly to ridicule before you grasp.

It is not god that is limited by concept; it is our awareness that is limited.

Awareness is the "living water springing up" that was offered by the Galilean carpenter to the woman at the well. It was offered on the spot - no confession, no forgiveness, no blood sacrifice.

"If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water."

How it got past the editors, I do not know.



Since: May 11

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11094
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
It is unseemly to ridicule before you grasp.
It is not god that is limited by concept; it is our awareness that is limited.
Awareness is the "living water springing up" that was offered by the Galilean carpenter to the woman at the well. It was offered on the spot - no confession, no forgiveness, no blood sacrifice.
"If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water."
How it got past the editors, I do not know.
So what you`re saying is we need to scan for the post powerful entity in the universe in the minutia?

...followed by having a drink of water....

Blood sacrifice, lets deal with that shall we?

If I was told that hunger, war, pestilence, plague, famine and general nastiness all over the world would cease, if I gave my life, you know I think I`d probably do it.

My daughter would never want, she`d never get sick, she`d live a healthy and happy life as would the rest of humanity.

I was a soldier, I`d have died for less and if I was given the choice I would die in a second, torture me for three days if you like, I`d probably laugh while you were doing it because I knew the outcome.

I`ll put it out there...I wish that would happen, sincerely I want it to happen today. If I`m not on topix tonight you know why.

Now lets look at the notion that after I die I WILL BE RESURRECTED.

IT IS A GUARANTEE THAT I WILL LIVE AGAIN AFTER THREE DAYS. I will then go to heaven and my memory will live on for thousands of years as people everywhere worship said memory.

DOOOD PLEASE!!!!! Where was the sacrifice?

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11095
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>So what you`re saying is we need to scan for the post powerful entity in the universe in the minutia?

...followed by having a drink of water....

Blood sacrifice, lets deal with that shall we?

If I was told that hunger, war, pestilence, plague, famine and general nastiness all over the world would cease, if I gave my life, you know I think I`d probably do it.

My daughter would never want, she`d never get sick, she`d live a healthy and happy life as would the rest of humanity.

I was a soldier, I`d have died for less and if I was given the choice I would die in a second, torture me for three days if you like, I`d probably laugh while you were doing it because I knew the outcome.

I`ll put it out there...I wish that would happen, sincerely I want it to happen today. If I`m not on topix tonight you know why.

Now lets look at the notion that after I die I WILL BE RESURRECTED.

IT IS A GUARANTEE THAT I WILL LIVE AGAIN AFTER THREE DAYS. I will then go to heaven and my memory will live on for thousands of years as people everywhere worship said memory.

DOOOD PLEASE!!!!! Where was the sacrifice?
The sacrifice was...wait, I can't answer this, I can't think of anything.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11096
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you`re saying is we need to scan for the post powerful entity in the universe in the minutia?
...followed by having a drink of water....
Blood sacrifice, lets deal with that shall we?
If I was told that hunger, war, pestilence, plague, famine and general nastiness all over the world would cease, if I gave my life, you know I think I`d probably do it.
My daughter would never want, she`d never get sick, she`d live a healthy and happy life as would the rest of humanity.
I was a soldier, I`d have died for less and if I was given the choice I would die in a second, torture me for three days if you like, I`d probably laugh while you were doing it because I knew the outcome.
I`ll put it out there...I wish that would happen, sincerely I want it to happen today. If I`m not on topix tonight you know why.
Now lets look at the notion that after I die I WILL BE RESURRECTED.
IT IS A GUARANTEE THAT I WILL LIVE AGAIN AFTER THREE DAYS. I will then go to heaven and my memory will live on for thousands of years as people everywhere worship said memory.
DOOOD PLEASE!!!!! Where was the sacrifice?
Where? Nowhere.

I plainly said "no sacrifice".

I'm saying Jesus did not die for our sins.

I'm saying Jesus was not unique or different than the rest of us, except for wisdom and awareness, in many cases.

I do not advocate "worship" of Jesus or anything.

I have no idea what prompted your questions.

Since: May 11

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11097
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Where? Nowhere.
I plainly said "no sacrifice".
I'm saying Jesus did not die for our sins.
I'm saying Jesus was not unique or different than the rest of us, except for wisdom and awareness, in many cases.
I do not advocate "worship" of Jesus or anything.
I have no idea what prompted your questions.
...lets face it mr`Crick` you say a lot of things, few of them are cogent, consider yourself a used q-tip for the rest of the day,

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11098
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
...lets face it mr`Crick` you say a lot of things, few of them are cogent, consider yourself a used q-tip for the rest of the day,
My comments are not cogent?

You are the one who came down with the unconnected rant for something I did not say.

Imhotep

Brandon, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11099
May 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Theists who believe in a divinely created Earth, and in the literal truth of the alleged 'holy book' aka the Bible containing 'hearsay' stories, written by primitive men, must reinterpret all new things discovered in light of the same source material.

The atheist will read this and then make a judgment if it warrants merit or outright rejection. They will not seek an apologist - they will use their Theists who believe in a divinely created Earth, and in the literal truth of the alleged 'holy book' aka the Bible containing 'hearsay' stories, written by primitive men, must reinterpret all new things discovered in light of the same source material.

The atheist will read this and then make a judgment if it warrants merit or outright rejection.

They will not seek an apologist - they will use their own mind to determine the validity of the content.

In short they will question anything and everything.

The literal theist, on the other hand, is forced to say ...

"Either that's a lie, it's wrong, or God is testing my faith by giving ME yet more contradictory evidence that on the surface seems telling but really doesn't mean anything."

“Reason and faith are opposites, two mutually exclusive terms: there is no reconciliation or common ground. Faith is belief without, or in spite of, reason.”~George H. Smith

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 10,701 - 10,720 of14,394
|
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.

•••
•••
•••
•••