Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 24181 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

Chemnitz, Germany

#11331 Jan 24, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
BS. Morality is a function of society. If there were only one person on earth, morality would be irrelevant. The fact that we are a social species dictates that we will live together. There are better and worse ways to live together (as determined by the happiness of the people involved, the art and science produced, etc). Morality is simple the optimal way of living together.
I would not expect a species from another planet to have the same morality as we do simply because their biology would be different: the things that make them happy and that are important for their societies because of their biology will be different. So our morality is certainly NOT absolute: it is a local thing restricted to humans.
On another poster I emphasised morality is class bound. Different classes have different (more or less) moralities. For instance the morality of the stone age differed from the slaveowners and feudalism and capitalism and so on.
Henry

Chemnitz, Germany

#11332 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, the Bible disagrees with you, it says you do know God, but that you have denied and suppressed that truth so that you can carry on living a sinful life.
I base my worldview on the Bible, not your opinion.
As to why I should apologise, are you saying there is an absolute standard of morality you are pointing to, which I should adhere to?
And do you also think that the atheists on this thread that have insulted christians, should also apologise based on that same absolute standard?
No?
I thought not...
As an atheist I am contrary the bible and I hold the bible has much changed during its 1500 years and there were the mighty and the rich ones who introduced its influence irregular of the objective knowledge. God has nothing to do with the contents of the scriptures, it was not existing at all!
Lincoln

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#11333 Jan 24, 2013
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
On another poster I emphasised morality is class bound. Different classes have different (more or less) moralities. For instance the morality of the stone age differed from the slaveowners and feudalism and capitalism and so on.
stone age man left no written records....:-)
Please describe your knowledge of stone age man and his

"(more or less) moralitie"
Henry

Chemnitz, Germany

#11334 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
Why are you here philosophising polymath257?
You have just denied that it is a rational means for acquiring knowledge?
Engaging in rational thought to answer transcendentant questions is of no value to you?
Then why are you then arguing that reason is circular and self attesting?
You realise these are philosophical issues you are engaging in.
Another inconsistency in your worldview.
You are not selling your atheism very well.
I have to abandon reason and philosophy, to be on the same intellectual level as you...
Sorry, I am not "selling" atheism at all. Education may have a hand in the realisation of atheism.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#11335 Jan 24, 2013
Ya I guess he will only be dodging questions on the other thread with Dave licking his sack.
Just Think wrote:
Oh well, looks like thinks got a bit too rough for mtimber trying to defend the indefensible.
Good riddance.
Henry

Chemnitz, Germany

#11336 Jan 24, 2013
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing on that page exonerates the Bible. Israelite soldiers capture and rape women and it is supported by your god.
How do you explain this?
<quoted text>
Doesn't even matter. I can show that your moral system is self-contradictory without appealing to an alternative system.
God has nothing to do with, it does not exist!
Lincoln

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#11337 Jan 24, 2013
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
As an atheist I am contrary the bible and I hold the bible has much changed during its 1500 years and there were the mighty and the rich ones who introduced its influence irregular of the objective knowledge. God has nothing to do with the contents of the scriptures, it was not existing at all!
"I am contrary.."
"I hold the bible..."

The "I" of importance
Henry

Chemnitz, Germany

#11338 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus was quoting the old testament...
I don`t think Jesus "quoted" anything. Certain seems to be he is approximately 2000 years dead
Lincoln

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#11339 Jan 24, 2013
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
God has nothing to do with, it does not exist!
"God has nothing to do with, it does not exist!

He has spoken,
the
all important

"I".

too much caffeine ?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#11340 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
Remember, the Bible is the basis for my worldview.
Yes, we know.

That's why you condone genocide, killing of gays, killing of those who exercise freedom of religion, etc.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#11341 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
In Eden, Eve was offered the opportunity to reason apart from God.
Foolishly, she decided that that was desirable.
Since then, man has been wise in his own eyes, setting himself up as being able to reason apart from God.
To reason above God.
It is this condition, that you are displaying.
You want to reason apart from God, to sit in judgment on God.
This theme is spread throughout the Bible and is the essence of the sinful nature.
A created being, who fancies himself more powerful than the Creator and thinks he can sit in judgment of the Creator.
Because of that, your reasoning is separated from Gods reasoning and ends up being reduced to foolishness.
aka:
arockdidit
etc...
You see if you reject the source of logic and reason, you end up rejecting logic and reason.
This is manifested in a contradictory and arbitrary worldview, which you are displaying.
Proof is in the pudding etc.
So it's blame women, eh?

No wonder the Bible is no friend to women.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#11342 Jan 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
You just blew out what's left of his mind.
Sad for him, isn't it? His binary brain is only capable of zero or one, you see... sad.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world.

Those who get binary and those who don't.

Hi Bob - nice to see you 'round these parts again!

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#11343 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus was quoting the old testament...
?

What's this?

You said...
mtimber wrote:
You have missed the fact that there are two aspects and not one.

Love God.
Love your neighbour.

Now as God is in fact the Creator, then of course He is the originator.

But your prejudiced worldview will suppress the obvious, just so you can carry on being wrong as long as you want.
I responded...
Khatru wrote:
Are you sure about that?

Contrast someone who loves their neighbour and denies your god, with someone who loves your god but denies their neighbour.
Which one gets their ticket to heaven?

In any event, why did it take your god tens of thousands of years before he got around to telling people to love their neighbours?
After all, an omniscient cosmic mega-being like yours must have known about the Golden Rule and how it is one of the highest measures of good ethical behaviour. Yet your god chose to ignore it until the New Testament.

Of course, while your god was ignoring the Golden Rule, other gods from other belief systems (Hinduism, Jainism) were advocating its use.

In summary, the New Testament tells us that the way to get into Heaven is not that we observe the Golden Rule. Instead, it's that we love Jesus, and to your god, that is more important than following the Golden Rule.

It's not nice to harm your fellow humans but as long as you end up loving Jesus with all your heart then you'll be OK for your ticket to Heaven
Then you respond with...
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus was quoting the old testament...
You're rambling. What has this got to do with my post?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#11344 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Your argument collapses, because until you can account for the origin of the universe, you have no ultimate standard from which to argue...
To use knowledge absolutely, you have to account for knowledge absolutely.
The Hindus can account for the origin of the universe.

So can the Maoris.

You're ethics are no better than theirs.

In fact, they're probably worse because while your god was s instructing his followers to kill others, the Hindu deities were advocating the Golden Rule.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#11345 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I get it, don't worry.
A fetus has less value to you than a dog.
You're not from the UK, are you?

Otherwise you'd have spelled it "foetus"
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#11346 Jan 24, 2013
Hitler called him "the one that got away."
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
I don`t think Jesus "quoted" anything. Certain seems to be he is approximately 2000 years dead

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#11347 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Your argument collapses, because until you can account for the origin of the universe, you have no ultimate standard from which to argue...
To use knowledge absolutely, you have to account for knowledge absolutely.
Yes, we know you'll obey your deity if you think he's telling you to slit the throat of the girl next door.

We know that you think it's a disgusting thing if Josef Fritzl's daughter doesn't honour her father.
George from NC

Durham, NC

#11348 Jan 24, 2013
paarsurrey wrote:
I don't think it will ever happen; since there is not a single evidence with the atheists that the Creator God does not exist.
If you have give it here.
You can never prove a negative. The proof will have to come from your side. Give us rational, logical, and provable proof of a god. Christians have been trying to do it for 2000 years, and only the sheep follow the lies.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#11349 Jan 24, 2013
Just to re-iterate, if anyone wants to continue the debate, I have moved to the other thread as it makes no sense to be posting on the same subject in two places at once:

http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TUGI0DV...
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#11350 Jan 24, 2013
As a thought, do you know of a single religion that states: "I haven't a bloody clue where all this Universe stuff came from! I am totally nonplussed."

Is a fixed creation myth a prerequisite, I wonder?
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
The Hindus can account for the origin of the universe.
So can the Maoris.
You're ethics are no better than theirs.
In fact, they're probably worse because while your god was s instructing his followers to kill others, the Hindu deities were advocating the Golden Rule.

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) 4 min Subduction Zone 74,759
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 30 min Dogen 4,048
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 1 hr John 115
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 8 hr Subduction Zone 6,084
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) Thu Subduction Zone 32,062
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Wed John 4,951
News Why do public atheists have to behave like such... Jun 21 Eagle 12 - 4
More from around the web