Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 24182 comments on the Psychology Today story from Apr 25, 2012, titled Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038. In it, Psychology Today reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Psychology Today.

Henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#10486 Jan 16, 2013
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
But which one? There are so many gods and so many religions to chose from.
Very sorry there are not any gods and religions are just myths nothing else or even something worse!
Henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#10487 Jan 16, 2013
DJ Hewlet wrote:
<quoted text>
Athiests are not selective. They deny the existence of all gods.
No, gods are not existing, so they can not be denied!

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10488 Jan 16, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that there is plenty of evidence for God and millions believe it.
Think of the ramifications if you are right. One is that all you are is atoms in motion with not ultimate purpose.
I don't see that as being anything to be unduly worried about.

Why should there be a purpose?
Henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#10489 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and I never said ID was a fallacy. A fallacy is a misleading or unsound argument.
ID isn't an "argument", it's just not science. Come up with some verifiable predictions that allow ID to be tested and clearly state the null hypothesis for these tests and then we can all consider ID on it's merits. Until you do that, you're just blowing smoke.
ID is just garbage no more!
Henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#10490 Jan 16, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
It's your denial which is idiotic, darling!
Atheism may have existed since immemorial times, I don't doubt that, but the first atheist state was the Soviet Union which proclaimed it in its constitution. So, in fact atheism REACHED POWER in 1917. So, from then on, we can see what atheists can do when they are in charge, and free to impose their views.
No country before the USSR was established as an atheist state; they were all theist, from one form or the other.
Among the first thing they did was to kill or imprison the religious clergy, expropriate or destroy religious buildings, persecute believers, and create a regime of fear to impose atheism on millions of folks who didn't want it.
In fact, with the instruments of state (police, secret services, army, communist party, prison camps) they were far more powerful than any church ever was, in christiandom at least.
The enforcement of atheism was maintained for 70 years; ask anyone coming from the ex-Soviet Union about it! Ask them if it was fallacies...
Being suspected of being religious could damage your social prospect, a place at university for your kids, promotion at work, material advantages such as lodging or holidays, etc... and even at time cost your life. That's what militant atheism is! It is totally intolerent.
The same system was repeated in China and North Korea, Cuba, Angola, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Vietnam, etc... all countries with atheist governments.
Atheists are on the march! Capitalists are on the end. The age of nuclear thread can defeat the humanity for ever. Religions are an additional threat to humanity!
Northpal

Toronto, Canada

#10491 Jan 16, 2013
Religion will cease to exist sometime in the 21st century. Replaced by the jew bolshevik atheism - yea!
Henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#10492 Jan 16, 2013
MUQ wrote:
Will Atheism defeat religion by 2038?
This is topic of this thread and a very interesting too, because someone has stick out his or her neck and made a definite "prediction" or "prophesy".
It is easier to understand such things by past examples, I would try to do so.
I would like to pose a different question: What happened to so called Socialism and Communism?
A. Could any one say in 1960 s and 1970 s that "Communism and Socialism” would be dead by 1990 s?:
I think not even the "Most committed Capitalist" could make such a remark. In 60 s and 70 s the Socialism and Communism was the "Hot word". It was spreading like wild fire and new nations (mostly poor nations of Asia and Africa and Eastern Europe) were consumed by it.
Murmuring against it in Hungary was quenched in One Day,
Soft revolt against it in Chezslovakia was crushed in One Day.
Same thing happened in the case of Poland and Solidarity in 1970 s.
In UNO, the "Capitalist countries" were in minority and were only surviving thru Veto" Power.
In books and lectures and seminars and debates, there was no way in which any one could prove that Capitalism was a better system than Socialism or Communism.
B. What led to the so quick demise of the Socialism and / or Capitalism?
If you ask "capitalists" they would say that USSR was "duped" to spend too much on arms in the arm race with USA and became bankrupt.
Other people would give other reasons.
According to me, the Socialism and Capitalism both had a deadly flaw that they were against basic human nature!! And any thing against Basic human nature can only be enforced by outside force and not by the will and heart of people.
The moment this pressure is removed, people would revolt against it. That is how every country where Socialism or communism was practiced went under dictatorship and police and military brutality.
Both these philosophies therefore were destined for failure and it became clear "when they were at a pinnacle of their powers".
But on ground it happened when Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979!!. That was the "end" of their "Moral Superiority and Leadership" in the world.
A world superpower invading a small and poor country with no justification and with no provocation?
They lost the respect of the world Â… and when Gorbachev removed the pressure that was propping up the regime, the whole structure collapsed to the ground.
That gives us a postulate "Any system which is against Basic Human Nature" is bound to fail, its life is limited.
D. Is Atheism not against Basic Human Nature?
I am asking this question now, because in my view Atheism is against basic human nature. No one in his or her right mind would ever believe that this huge Universe and every thing in it just came out by itself, without any plan, design, purpose or Creator at the back of it.
Different religions have different models for this Creator and this "confusion" has given a temporary platform for these Atheists to come out and dare to "predict" the date by which they will defeat the religion.
(Contd.)
Atheists are not having to defeat any religions, Don Quichote has defeated all religions long ago! Only analphabetism is slowing Atheism.
Henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#10493 Jan 16, 2013
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
Except that you have no proof that this god exists.
God never existed!

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10494 Jan 16, 2013
It seems that some atheists want to claim the moral high ground in society.

What puzzles me is why they would care?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10495 Jan 16, 2013
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
God never existed!
Are you omniscient?
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10496 Jan 16, 2013
Do you want to claim the low ground?
mtimber wrote:
It seems that some atheists want to claim the moral high ground in society.
What puzzles me is why they would care?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10497 Jan 16, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Do you want to claim the low ground?
<quoted text>
Can you define the low ground and give a rational explanation as to why it is low ground?
bloomoon

Santa Fe, NM

#10498 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and I never said ID was a fallacy. A fallacy is a misleading or unsound argument.
ID isn't an "argument", it's just not science. Come up with some verifiable predictions that allow ID to be tested and clearly state the null hypothesis for these tests and then we can all consider ID on it's merits. Until you do that, you're just blowing smoke.
Is science omipotent?

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#10499 Jan 16, 2013
sickofit wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted fact LIAR.....Your insane....I will pick facts and truth over a nazi like religion who at its core is hate filled racist and bigoted and only wants to cotnrol and surpress people.
Anyway as you religous freaks die off this world gets better.....THAT IS ANOTHER FACT.
Are you trying to convince me or yourself?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10500 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you define the low ground and give a rational explanation as to why it is low ground?
Killing witches.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10501 Jan 16, 2013
bloomoon wrote:
<quoted text>
Is science omipotent?
No. Neither is it omniscient, which is what you were really attempting to ask.

But it is the only method we have of gleaning any testable / verifiable understanding about how reality functions.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10502 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Killing witches.
Why is killing witches wrong?

As an atheist you have no reason to hold that moral view...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10503 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No. Neither is it omniscient, which is what you were really attempting to ask.
But it is the only method we have of gleaning any testable / verifiable understanding about how reality functions.
You can verify abiogenesis?

Empirically?
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#10505 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is killing witches wrong?
As an atheist you have no reason to hold that moral view...
Atheists aren't less moral than religionists.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#10506 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No. Neither is it omniscient, which is what you were really attempting to ask.
But it is the only method we have of gleaning any testable / verifiable understanding about how reality functions.
You do not need an intercessor whether it be religion or science to define and validate reality for you. As a co-creator with God, you already possess that knowledge. Being is its own justification.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 min Regolith Based Li... 23,543
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 42 min scientia potentia... 48,729
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 1 hr Uncle Sam 72
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 3 hr Richardfs 5,706
News In defense of faith 9 hr karl44 6
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 13 hr Thinking 21,881
News Louisiana Christians reclaim safe space by runn... 18 hr Amused 3
More from around the web