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.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12453 Feb 6, 2013
rio wrote:
I think the public purse is better off exempting churches from taxations than having to support them! Just look at Germany, where the churches are state supported, and clerics paid by the government
The citizens of Germany would likely be better off it the state did neither - neither tax exemption nor subvention. Why pay clerics? Let them become gainfully employed. If the church can't survive without public assistance, let it vanish.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12454 Feb 6, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>Excellent post, sir!
Thanks, Terry.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12455 Feb 6, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
Not to mention the top quark before that and the W and Z particles before that. And that doesn't mention the host of particles that aren't fundamental (being made of quarks, for example) but are accurately predicted by the theory. And it isn't just the energies, it is also the spins, the parities, the interaction strengths, and other specific properties of the particles.
All in all, much better 'prophesies' than some non-sense about feet of clay or iron.
Yes, and thank you for that.

Biblical prophecy is offered as evidence that the bible is of divine origin and to be trusted. Yet the people touting it are completely unfazed by scientific prophecy, which unlike biblical prophecy, is high quality prophecy:

[a] High quality prophecy needs to be specific, detailed and unambiguous. Optimally, the time and place are specified.

[b] It also needs to prophecy something unexpected, unlikely or unique - something that was not self-fulfilling and could not have been contrived.

[c] The prophecies must be verified that they came before the event predicted, and that they were fulfilled completely.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#12456 Feb 6, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right, the "Experts" are very adept at what they present as "Most probable explanation" for the observed facts.
Just by doing that, so many "theories" and "half cooked ideas" have been taken as "proven facts".
Just look at the TOE and wonder, how little we actually know and how big claims have been made about it!!
And every one believes that TOE is an "established scientific theory"!!
Just because you were afraid of studying physics for 6-10 years does not mean you can go around saying nobody knows about it.

Physics is hard. That is why there are only a few people who work on these problems.

Just because you don't understand something does not make it false.

The problem with you religious folks is that you think reading a religious book is a substitute for hard work, long nights running experiments and writing papers for no pay or food - with no guarantee of results.

If religious people knew what scientists have to do day in and day out to put out a paper, they would die of exhaustion. Its more simple for a religious person to ask thin air for a favour and then sit down and let the universe cure AIDs and cancer itself...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#12457 Feb 6, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
People are in no danger - just Christian institutions and Christian cultural hegemony. This is a culture war - you know, like the one you were waging when you were conflating secular humanists with Mao and Pol Pot and science with faith.
Don't kid yourself, Gomer. We're the masters of atrocities. We will rule the world and you're going to be the first one on our hit list. LOL!
Thinking

Uckfield, UK

#12458 Feb 6, 2013
In a similar vein, what about "You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God,visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me..."

Is abusing children yet unborn an absolute rule?
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
What about "Honour they father and mother"?
Is that an absolute rule?
Thinking

Uckfield, UK

#12459 Feb 6, 2013
Straw man.

Secular does not mean amoral.

Of course there is progress. That's why christards don't get to burn witches so much these days. That's why our murder rates are falling whilst church congregations are dwindling. You can trust people to do the right thing more every year.
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Better society? There can be no moral progress in an amoral secular society and this is reflected in the media....
Thinking

Uckfield, UK

#12460 Feb 6, 2013
Easy to read between the lines: rio wants to help islam take hold at a time when normal people are suddenly getting sick of it.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
The citizens of Germany would likely be better off it the state did neither - neither tax exemption nor subvention. Why pay clerics? Let them become gainfully employed. If the church can't survive without public assistance, let it vanish.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12461 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
An eye for an eye. The more you comment, the more Christian-like you seem. In many ways orthodox religion and science are similar. Both loudly proclaim their search for truth. Both treat their beliefs as truth, with which no one should tamper. They each have their own vocabulary which is used to enforce their "exclusive" organizations. They both claim to have the way to truth ...
Texas sharpshooter fallacy. You can do this with any two sets of ideas - identify a cluster of similarities and pretend that they are significant, like a Texan shooting at a barn and drawing a target around of cluster of hits. Here's a famous one, deconstructed by Snopes at http://www.snopes.com/history/american/lincol... :

• Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

• Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

• The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

• Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

• Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

• Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

• Both were shot in the head.

• Lincoln's secretary, Kennedy, warned him not to go to the theatre.
Kennedy's secretary, Lincoln, warned him not to go to Dallas.

• Both were assassinated by Southerners, and both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.

• Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

• John Wilkes Booth was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald was born in 1939.

• Both assassins were known by their three names.

• Both names are comprised of fifteen letters

• Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.
Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.

• Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

[They forgot that John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald each contain fifteen letters.]

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#12462 Feb 6, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I just saw this in an article entitled "Intelligent design bill in Missouri" dated January 12th, 2012:
"House Bill 1227, introduced in the Missouri House of Representatives on January 10, 2012, would, if enacted, require "the equal treatment of science instruction regarding evolution and intelligent design," according to the legislature's summary of the bill."
http://ncse.com/news/2012/01/intelligent-desi...
Those people are already far enough behind.
And have a look at this... http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2013/feb/05/tenn...

More Christian craziness, clearly unconstitutional even on the state level.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12463 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
Science, in stating that the universe is an accidental creation ...
Where does science say that. Whenever I read something like that, it is always from a Christian.
insidesecrets wrote:
... a meaningless happenstance clearly conveys a belief that the universe and man's existence has no value
Not to me or the other atheists I know. That sounds like more Christian thought.
insidesecrets wrote:
...a belief that separates man from his own mystical nature...
You have that backwards.

Your religion works to separate man from his world and his true nature. It teaches that he is an alien in an alien world made of base matter, one slated to be destroyed in an apocalyptic fury.

He is taught not to be a part of it:

• Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.- 1 John 2:15

• Do not conform to the pattern of this world - Romans 12:2

He is taught to view the very substance of his body - flesh - as profane. Chrisitans can hardly utter the word "flesh" without spitting.

• For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want.- Galatians 5:16-18

• For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh.- Philippians 3:2-4

Man is taught to deny his own nature. He is to stifle his curiosity, his sense of reason, his conscience, his libido, and his free will.

He's taught that even his mind is alien - that the voice in his head is a demon speaking to him, and to ignore it.

And he is taught to separate himself psychologically even from his own family:

• If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple.- Luke 14:26

He is taught to divert his attention from our world and the years of his life, and to redirect it toward an imaginary realm of ghosts, and to a time that he will never see.

How's that for separation?

You talk about meaning and purpose, but what is this great purpose you imagine for yourself? To spend eternity slavishly kissing the ass of a selfish and needy tyrant? What is the value of such a life to anybody else but that god?

You live your lives like you're sitting at a bus stop waiting to be whisked away, with your attention, gratitude, and loyalty deflected to a nonexistent place you'll never see populated by ghosts that never existed. Where's the meaning in that?

This is why I say that there is no spirituality in Christian dogma. Spirituality, if anything, is a sense of awe and mystery regarding the world, a sense of connection to it, and a sense of gratitude for it. Your faith kills all of those.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12464 Feb 6, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
And have a look at this... http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2013/feb/05/tenn...
More Christian craziness, clearly unconstitutional even on the state level.
Yikes.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12465 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
Oddly enough, your interpretation of the Bible is far more literal than a Christian.
The stories were written to be understood literally except where called parables.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12466 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
If you can have reason without faith, you can have faith without reason.
Yes. It helps, as with snake handlers.

You can also have faith without compassion. That also helps, as when not suffering witches.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12467 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
I said nothing about absolutes. I said the Ten Commandments have influenced our laws as well as our culture.
To the extent that that is true, it is irrelevant to your pitch to worship the Christian god, which to my knowledge, did not come up with a single good idea. Or maybe you can enlighten us to some moral precept worth keeping that first appeared in the Christian bible.

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#12468 Feb 6, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
And have a look at this... http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2013/feb/05/tenn...
More Christian craziness, clearly unconstitutional even on the state level.
A judge blocked one of those bills here last year. Texas even blocked one as well. When will these idiots stop this crap?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12469 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
Your paranoia shows the ways in which private beliefs can distort actual events. The Catholic Church hasn't held political power since the Dark Ages. While the paranoid is convinced that his distorted view is valid, this does not change other people's perception of the same happening.
Catholic or Protestant, Sunni or Shia - who cares? Besides, many medieval popes had immense political power. And I'd call the Spanish Inquisition political power. Even today, the ability of the RCC to resist investigation for brokering in children is evidence of its political power.

And that church would surely burn us again tomorrow if it could.

Are you a Catholic? If so, I have a few questions for you

[1] Would you recommend that the mother of adolescent boys join the Catholic church, let her sons become altar boys, and allow them to spend unsupervised time with Catholic priests? Id so, why?

[2] Knowing what we know about your church, should a mother that leaves her sons with priests that molest them be treated differently from one who leaves her child alone in a crack house? If so, why?

[3] Since the Roman Catholic church is a known international pedophilic sex syndicate, doesn't tithing to it knowing that make one a supporter and an enabler of sexual crimes against children, like somebody who purchases kiddie porn? Aren't you actually underwriting the trafficking in boys? If no, why not?

[4] Are the priests, bishops, cardinals and popes who turned a blind eye, reassign known pedophile priests to unsuspecting, or pay hush money to cover up crimes and enable them any less criminal than the offending pedophile? If not, why not?

[5] Since foreign heads of state like Hussein and Noriega that merely threaten Americans are often taken by force, should the Vatican, which facilitates the molestation of American boys, not also be raided by Navy Seals or UN forces, and the pope frog marched before cameras to justice by force like Hussein and Noriega? If not, what makes the pope and exception? His skin color? That he says "Jesus, Jesus" a lot?
Thinking

Uckfield, UK

#12470 Feb 6, 2013
When they've died?

This Jim Tracy moron is trying to depose another anti-abortion republican... so anti-abortion in fact, he "pushed his patient and mistress to get an abortion and agreed that his wife should have two."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_DesJarlais#Person...
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
A judge blocked one of those bills here last year. Texas even blocked one as well. When will these idiots stop this crap?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#12471 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
As a group, scientists rigorously oppose the existence of telepathy or clairvoyance, or any philosophy that brings these into focus.
If these things exist, it will be scientists that discover and demonstrate it, not priests or Christian apologists.
insidesecrets wrote:
Science will forever escape opening up into any great vision of the meaning of life.
What is the meaning of a life distracted from reality and focused on the time after its death?

Let me explain something to you:

We have dispatched with your biblical science and outperformed your best prophets.

And we have discarded your authoritarian ideas about government and family.

Although you claim to hold a monopoly on it, there is no spirituality in your philosophy, which gives no meaning nor purpose to life. Au contraie. It strips it of meaning.

Likewise with your moral code. Far from your church having a monopoly on morals, we find them grossly inadequate.

There is nothing we want from your religion except for it to go away.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#12472 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
That would depend on what you consider reason.
The opposite of everything you post.

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) 7 min Chimney1 48,552
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 24 min Rings9780 21,867
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 1 hr JustASkeptic 17
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 6 hr Into The Night 23,503
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 hr New Age Spiritual... 258,040
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Dec 3 Eagle 12 4,907
Why you need to make sure you are saved before ... Dec 2 Scaritual 14
More from around the web