Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Apr 25, 2012 Full story: Psychology Today 23,565

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.

Read more

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#21425 Feb 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
That's an absurd statement.
Thanks for coming over to this thread. Your input is welcome.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#21426 Feb 21, 2014
trandiode wrote:
Hence why the burden of proof is upon the Atheists ! Please explain your whole concept of a nothingness !
...the space between your ears.

Judged:

25

25

25

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#21427 Feb 21, 2014
I've been watching the live Sean Carroll - William Craig debate.

Craig is debating that "cosmology gives evidence of the likelihood of God".

Craig's method is to spout a lot of very high-powered physics which very few of the listeners understand. And that he (Craig) is incredulous that the universe could not have a creator.

Carroll's points all boiled down to...Craig is misrepresenting what physics says. And that Craig's incredulity is not an argument.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#21428 Feb 21, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
I've been watching the live Sean Carroll - William Craig debate.
Craig is debating that "cosmology gives evidence of the likelihood of God".
Craig's method is to spout a lot of very high-powered physics which very few of the listeners understand. And that he (Craig) is incredulous that the universe could not have a creator.
Carroll's points all boiled down to...Craig is misrepresenting what physics says. And that Craig's incredulity is not an argument.
Craig is a modern-day snake-oil salesman. He thinks that using polysyllables will make his points more believable.

He is a master of endless collections of $64 dollar words-in-a-row, all of which add up to nada.

I actually have more respect for Ken Hamm (which is very little) than William Craig.

Hamm is far more honest, he freely admits he puts 100% of his faith in the silly bible. Craig tries to pretend he likes science, all the while denying what science concludes.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#21429 Feb 21, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Craig is a modern-day snake-oil salesman. He thinks that using polysyllables will make his points more believable.
He is a master of endless collections of $64 dollar words-in-a-row, all of which add up to nada.
I actually have more respect for Ken Hamm (which is very little) than William Craig.
Hamm is far more honest, he freely admits he puts 100% of his faith in the silly bible. Craig tries to pretend he likes science, all the while denying what science concludes.
Quite true about Craig. He is definitely a slick speaker, but not a speaker of the truth.

He kept saying (paraphrasing here) "I am only saying that cosmology points to the likelihood of God, not that it is proof of God."

But you know that he expects the rubes to hear "This is proof of God."

Much of his presentation was intended to confuse the issue, obfuscating what science actually had to say. A lot of it amounted to "Don't believe what Carroll has to say. Listen to MY interpretation of science."

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#21430 Feb 21, 2014
trandiode wrote:
Hence why the burden of proof is upon the Atheists ! Please explain your whole concept of a nothingness ! I think once you try to start to work out its principles you may be quite taken back on how much of a ridiculous and unrealistic concept that to believe in a nothingness really is !
Sorry, tran, but it is YOU that is making a claim. You are claiming that this God character exists. The burden of proof is upon you.

Do you have to provide proof that Santa Claus does not exist? Or would the burden of proof be upon the person claiming Santa Claus exists. The same is true for claiming God exists.

The only claim we atheists are making is that there is no evidence for your God, or any other god. You could prove us wrong by providing such evidence. But no one ever has.

(BTW...the Bible is not evidence. The Bible is the claim. And "flowers are pretty" isn't evidence either.)

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#21431 Feb 21, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Talking of droopy tits I see Puck Frick is spamming his incomplete definition of Atheism again.
<quoted text>
Buck doesn't understand atheism. Buck doesn't WANT to understand atheism. Buck only wants to obfuscate.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#21432 Feb 21, 2014
"Without religion there is no basis of any morality, it is just a tit for tat affair." I would have to disagree. Perhaps hundreds and thousands of yrs ago, when the average citizen was not educated in any way, There might have been a need to use, the mythology of god to create fear to control the masses to form socitys.I would have to say that the morals and respect of an Atheist is much more seriously taken and more responsible towards the here and now, and the understanding of preserving all life on this planet. Again, religions at best are a philosophy, not fact, and are all manmade. I respect your right to choose your personal beliefs. But they are irrelevant to the realities and problems that face all mankind and the life that exists on this planet. Only mankind is going to save himself from himself.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#21433 Feb 21, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite true about Craig. He is definitely a slick speaker, but not a speaker of the truth.
He kept saying (paraphrasing here) "I am only saying that cosmology points to the likelihood of God, not that it is proof of God."
But you know that he expects the rubes to hear "This is proof of God."
Much of his presentation was intended to confuse the issue, obfuscating what science actually had to say. A lot of it amounted to "Don't believe what Carroll has to say. Listen to MY interpretation of science."
Yeah. I think Ham is the more honest of the two-- Ham unapologetically claims he follows his bible and nothing else.

Of course, Ham doesn't *really* follow the bible-- he's quite rich, for example, a clear violation of Jesus' commands on the subject.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#21434 Feb 21, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for coming over to this thread. Your input is welcome.
BTW...I watched the "Bible's Buried Secrets" again, and you were correct. I remembered the part where they said that David had been considered mythological, but had forgotten where they said the House of David stele was considered good historical proof of David's existence.

Also...re: the Carroll-Craig debate. It took place at a Southern Baptist seminary. The theologian that introduced the debate stated something to the effect...

"I believe we are all broken and we need Jesus to redeem us."

As you have pointed out in the past, Christianity debases all of us..."we are all broken". This is not, to me, an inspiring bit of dogma.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#21435 Feb 22, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
BTW...I watched the "Bible's Buried Secrets" again, and you were correct. I remembered the part where they said that David had been considered mythological, but had forgotten where they said the House of David stele was considered good historical proof of David's existence.
Thanks again for that link. I knew the part about the Exodus and siege of Canaan being mythology, but the material about the historicity of David and Solomon, and the J E D P documentary hypothesis material was new to me.

It's odd that we can establish that ancient figures like David, Solomon, Alexander and Caesar were all historical characters, but this alleged god Jesus still eludes confirmation.
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
re: the Carroll-Craig debate. It took place at a Southern Baptist seminary. The theologian that introduced the debate stated something to the effect... "I believe we are all broken and we need Jesus to redeem us." As you have pointed out in the past, Christianity debases all of us..."we are all broken". This is not, to me, an inspiring bit of dogma.
Yes, Christian scripture and doctrine, while calling itself the Good News and a message of love, is exactly the opposite. It is deeply pessimistic, nihilistic, and misanthropic. It describes man in the most vile and deprecatory language

I am pretty certain that if there were a second verbal species on earth whether through evolution or alien visitation, and it said the things about mankind that the Christian church does, that species would be despised by humanity and that we would have been in open conflict with it. The church can be seen to be just as much the enemy of mankind as such a hypothetical non-human presence.
I can read

Edinburgh, UK

#21436 Feb 22, 2014
trandiode wrote:
Hence why the burden of proof is upon the Atheists ! Please explain your whole concept of a nothingness ! I think once you try to start to work out its principles you may be quite taken back on how much of a ridiculous and unrealistic concept that to believe in a nothingness really is !
Nothingness is where nothing exists. Not even time.

Now explain where your god came from.

Since: Dec 06

Charlie's

#21437 Feb 22, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
The only claim we atheists are making is that there is no evidence for your God, or any other god. You could prove us wrong by providing such evidence. But no one ever has.
And when agnostic as me asks a trandiod about God's properties, I have no answer, or the most uninteresting answers, such as divine mystery ways, profession of faith, holly books quotes,

Since: Dec 06

Charlie's

#21438 Feb 22, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
The only claim we atheists are making is that there is no evidence for your God, or any other god. You could prove us wrong by providing such evidence. But no one ever has.
(BTW...the Bible is not evidence. The Bible is the claim. And "flowers are pretty" isn't evidence either.)
I have that claim: "God is man-made" this proposition is always true,
while Man si God made is uncertain a proposition.
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#21439 Feb 22, 2014
I can read wrote:
<quoted text>
Displaying your morality again there.
Bin Laden gets his Virgins but Buddha and Jesus both burn in hell because they took 'the wrong path'.
What percentage of all the humans ever to have lived have had their everlasting souls sent to burn in hell for all eternity just because they didn't believe in the same sky fairy you do?
Again you are trying to put words in my mouth which I never said.

Who goes to heavens and who goes to hell is for God to decide.

We only talk about the criterion, and why should you worry about others?

In which group you fall?

Why should it be an idle discussion?
I can read

Edinburgh, UK

#21440 Feb 22, 2014
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you are trying to put words in my mouth which I never said.
Who goes to heavens and who goes to hell is for God to decide.
We only talk about the criterion, and why should you worry about others?
In which group you fall?
Why should it be an idle discussion?
You specifically said that the only sin allah couldn't forgive was not believing in him.

It seems you have trouble accepting that if that claim were true, Allah would be punishing some of the finest human beings ever to have lived as well as every single human being born before mohammed (and mohammed himself).

It isn't my fault your dogma is contadictory.

Since: Dec 06

Charlie's

#21441 Feb 22, 2014
MUQ wrote:
Who goes to heavens and who goes to hell is for God to decide.
We only talk about the criterion, and why should you worry about others?
In which group you fall?
Why should it be an idle discussion?
Because muslim's God and rules of life are the last I would agree with.
Banning music, entertainment, to that it should be same in its so-called paradise where these bans should remain.

Having a look at Allah's paradises
prophet wrote:
"The inhabitants of Paradise are hairless, beardless and have black eyes, their youth does not pass away and their garments do not wear out."
I don't want to have black eyes, I like to have renewable garments

[QUOTE who="Allah's Apostle"]...Any person who will enter Paradise will resemble Adam (in appearance and figure). People have been decreasing in stature since Adam's creation.[/QUOTE]
I don't want to look like Adam, I'm happy with my actual body, I like to see various type of men and women

[QUOTE who="Allah's Apostle"]The first group (of people) who will enter Paradise will be (glittering) like the moon when it is full. They will not spit or blow their noses or relieve nature. Their utensils will be of gold and their combs of gold and silver; in their centers the aloe wood will be used, and their sweat will smell like musk. Everyone of them will have two wives;[/QUOTE]
I dont' care things are gold-made or not, I don't like sweating conditions nor musky smells, just the two baby dolls seems to be interesting an offer.

Since: Dec 06

Charlie's

#21442 Feb 22, 2014
DonPanic wrote:
just the two baby dolls seems to be interesting an offer.
two hairless maids to be precise
Jane

Walsall, UK

#21443 Feb 22, 2014
Ring me 07923603151

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#21444 Feb 22, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks again for that link. I knew the part about the Exodus and siege of Canaan being mythology, but the material about the historicity of David and Solomon, and the J E D P documentary hypothesis material was new to me.
It's odd that we can establish that ancient figures like David, Solomon, Alexander and Caesar were all historical characters, but this alleged god Jesus still eludes confirmation.
<quoted text>
Yes, Christian scripture and doctrine, while calling itself the Good News and a message of love, is exactly the opposite. It is deeply pessimistic, nihilistic, and misanthropic. It describes man in the most vile and deprecatory language
I am pretty certain that if there were a second verbal species on earth whether through evolution or alien visitation, and it said the things about mankind that the Christian church does, that species would be despised by humanity and that we would have been in open conflict with it. The church can be seen to be just as much the enemy of mankind as such a hypothetical non-human presence.
I had known about the E, J, D & P writers before watching the show on NOVA when it first aired. It is pretty clear to anyone that really thinks about the first two chapters of Genesis that there were multiple writers. Genesis presents two accounts of creation. While there are some things they have in common, there are also a great many differences that shouldn't be there if a single writer had penned them.

And, yes, denigrating people is one of the manipulation techniques that Christianity has used since its inception. "You are all lower than whale dung, and only WE can help you." One of the earlier parts of the Psychology of Belief series talks about that one in part, though it puts it in a different framework. They point out that most people would not agree right away that they are lower than whale dung. The proselytizer starts with an innocuous question that you will agree with. And psychological tests have shown that after you have agreed once, you are more likely to agree again. So the proselytizer asks a second, less innocuous question to which you will agree. And so on, until you WILL agree that you are lower than whale dung.

This doesn't work on everyone, of course. But it does work on an amazingly large percentage of people.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 min thetruth 17,905
News Atheist monument to counter ten commandments (Jul '13) 4 hr thetruth 20
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 4 hr thetruth 236,755
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 4 hr shanna 9,206
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 4 hr thetruth 6,286
News The Consequences of Atheism 13 hr thetruth 1,106
News 'Good without a god': Faces of atheism in Oklahoma (Jul '13) 13 hr thetruth 7,547
More from around the web