Why Atheism Will Replace Religion

Aug 27, 2012 Full story: News24 14,435

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. Full Story

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#5016 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>I don't believe in anything that can't be supported by verifiable evidence. In short, I don't really require belief. As Thomas Jefferson said;

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
That's a really good quote. It doesn't prove that God doesn't exist, but it brings up a very good point. Nobody can CONVINCE someone to believe one way or the other. All the evidence in the world can't make someone a believer. That's not how I came to believe the way I do. By someone convincing me to. I don't know anybody who ever came to their belief in anything by being convinced. You have to find out on your own. Very good quote. I like it.:)

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#5017 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>There is no verifiable evidence for the existence of God. Which one were you talking about anyway? Man has created many gods in his own image. http://www.godchecker.com
"There is no verifiable evidence for the existence of God"

Wrong, Dead Wrong.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#5018 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>No matter where he got the information, it was not first hand and therefore hear say. There have been other that speculated that Josephus *may* have gotten the information from prior writings. But with no reference to these writings by Josephus or anyone else of the time, it is only speculation.

The short of it, you've only got what Josephus had, which is nothing.
What is your stance on the passing down of history or tradition throughout the generations via word of mouth? Cause humans have done it forever. Not just in regards to religion. We haven't always documented things the way that we do now. Yet history has still been handed down. You're right in that his information was not firsthand, but he would have had access to any and all Jewish documentation that existed at the time. I honestly can't say for sure what his sources were, as you said I wasn't there, but I do know that the Jews are a proud people who are dedicated to the preservation of their beliefs and traditions. I would think it would be highly unlikely that nothing would be there. Especially if he was using it to educate the Romans. lol The Romans were horrible to the Jews. I'm sure they woulda jumped on the chance to educate those smug bastards.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#5019 Feb 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"There is no verifiable evidence for the existence of God"
Wrong, Dead Wrong.
Riiiight, just ask any Hindu.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#5020 Feb 1, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a really good quote. It doesn't prove that God doesn't exist, but it brings up a very good point. Nobody can CONVINCE someone to believe one way or the other. All the evidence in the world can't make someone a believer. That's not how I came to believe the way I do. By someone convincing me to. I don't know anybody who ever came to their belief in anything by being convinced. You have to find out on your own. Very good quote. I like it.:)
You can't prove leprechauns don't exist either. Give it a try! Does that mean they exist?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#5021 Feb 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"There is no verifiable evidence for the existence of God"
Wrong, Dead Wrong.
It's exactly right. If it were wrong, we would all be of the same religion.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#5022 Feb 1, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>Riiiight, just ask any Hindu.
No need for me but you go ahead.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#5023 Feb 1, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
What is your stance on the passing down of history or tradition throughout the generations via word of mouth? Cause humans have done it forever. Not just in regards to religion. We haven't always documented things the way that we do now. Yet history has still been handed down. You're right in that his information was not firsthand, but he would have had access to any and all Jewish documentation that existed at the time. I honestly can't say for sure what his sources were, as you said I wasn't there, but I do know that the Jews are a proud people who are dedicated to the preservation of their beliefs and traditions. I would think it would be highly unlikely that nothing would be there. Especially if he was using it to educate the Romans. lol The Romans were horrible to the Jews. I'm sure they woulda jumped on the chance to educate those smug bastards.
If oral traditions were so great, why did we need to have writing?

There is an age old classroom exercise, you get a circle of kids (it works with adults too) of 20 or more people. Whisper something complex that you have in writing into the ear of one person. Have them repeat it to the person on the left as a whisper til it gets back to you. By the time it gets back, it will most likely not resemble what you said at all. This happens virtually without exception.

That's why oral traditions are not a good means of transmitting ideas and that's why we needed writing. Nowadays we have videos and audio recordings, so maybe we can dispense with writing now, but then, it was crucial.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#5024 Feb 1, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>If Josephus wrote of other deities those other deities were real too, right?

Josephus wrote about other deities more than the mythical Jesus deity, if that account really was about the Jesus, which is unclear and the usage of "Chrestus"...OOOPS, no, that was Tacitus that used the term, "Chrestus", and that was tampered with. http://www.natzraya.org/Articles/Christian/Ch...

Anyway...

Josephus writing about Jupiter.
http://books.google.com/books...
http://books.google.com/books...

Josephus also wrote of Heracles and many mythical deities.

Using Christian reasoning and logic as what suffices for evidence, we should believe in all of the deities that Tacitus and Josephus wrote about, not just the Jesus, yes?

This is something from the other side of the coin, concerning Josephus.

"Not a single writer before the 4th century – not Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius, etc.– in all their defences against pagan hostility, makes a single reference to Josephus’ wondrous words.
The third century Church 'Father' Origen, for example, spent half his life and a quarter of a million words contending against the pagan writer Celsus. Origen drew on all sorts of proofs and witnesses to his arguments in his fierce defence of Christianity. He quotes from Josephus extensively. Yet even he makes no reference to this 'golden paragraph' from Josephus, which would have been the ultimate rebuttal. In fact, Origen actually said that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ."
Origen did not quote the 'golden paragraph' because this paragraph had not yet been written.
It was absent from early copies of the works of Josephus and did not appear in Origen's third century version of Josephus, referenced in his Contra Celsum."
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-eta...

I wouldn't use Josephus as a proof of anything if I were you. Unless its to show that people believe in deities.

That's a given, and undisputed.
I don't dispute the belief in other deities. I just don't share their same belief. Of course, Josephus didn't believe in Jesus. Josephus was of Roman-Jewish descent. He was a Jew. Jews don't believe in Jesus as the Messiah. They're still waiting on their Messiah to come. However, Josephus did believe in God. Which is the same God of Christianity. The only work I've ever read of Josephus is the Antiquity of the Jews because it interests me. I haven't read anything else by him, but I'm curious to look into it now. Are you disputing Josephus as a reputable historian? Cause that's just strange. Or is it merely my reference to him that bothers you?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#5025 Feb 1, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't dispute the belief in other deities. I just don't share their same belief. Of course, Josephus didn't believe in Jesus. Josephus was of Roman-Jewish descent. He was a Jew. Jews don't believe in Jesus as the Messiah. They're still waiting on their Messiah to come. However, Josephus did believe in God. Which is the same God of Christianity. The only work I've ever read of Josephus is the Antiquity of the Jews because it interests me. I haven't read anything else by him, but I'm curious to look into it now. Are you disputing Josephus as a reputable historian? Cause that's just strange. Or is it merely my reference to him that bothers you?
I'm surprised it doesn't bother you.

Josephus supposedly mentions
Jupiter
Hercules
and Jesus (this part was most likely forged, but we can pretend it wasn't for now)

as real persons. So your claim is that because Josephus mentioned him, then he must be real. But then he also mentions Jupiter and Hercules ..... should we pray to them too based on this "evidence"?

It's about the quality of your evidence. If you don't believe it has any quality to it, why should we?

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#5026 Feb 1, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't dispute the belief in other deities. I just don't share their same belief. Of course, Josephus didn't believe in Jesus. Josephus was of Roman-Jewish descent. He was a Jew. Jews don't believe in Jesus as the Messiah. They're still waiting on their Messiah to come. However, Josephus did believe in God. Which is the same God of Christianity. The only work I've ever read of Josephus is the Antiquity of the Jews because it interests me. I haven't read anything else by him, but I'm curious to look into it now. Are you disputing Josephus as a reputable historian? Cause that's just strange. Or is it merely my reference to him that bothers you?
Historians of that period were more often than not "information gatherers".

That's what Josephus did. He recorded the stories, tales and legends of that time. Sure, at that point they may have been related as literal, a truth, but very little was done to verify those stories, other than trying to depict what was related.

Additionally, many times a historian may have been a simple scribe or transcriber, doing nothing more than recopying older histories from decaying and ancient volumes, merely for future preservation.
So, no, I'm not disputing that Josephus was a historian, but the term "historian" then, meant something quite different than it does now, and it's in that context Josephus is a historian.

So he wrote of Jupiter, Heracles, Hermes, other deities, supernatural events and figures, and also, the Jesus.

Here's the interesting thing, it is thought that the writing Josephus made concerning the Jesus may not have even been originated by Josephus, and was interpolated by some other 'scribe/historian", not Josephus.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#5027 Feb 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
No need for me but you go ahead.
I have, and their evidence sounds just like the evidence Christians present for their deity.

Imagine that.

However, I gotta admit, the Hindu could teach the Christian a thing or two about circular reasoning.

They are masters of that. Pretty good at the 'word salad sentences', too.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#5028 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>You can't prove leprechauns don't exist either. Give it a try! Does that mean they exist?
Who said anything about leprechauns? You can't prove they don't exist either. Personally, I hope they do cause I can think of a lot of things I could do with a pot of gold.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#5029 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>If oral traditions were so great, why did we need to have writing?

There is an age old classroom exercise, you get a circle of kids (it works with adults too) of 20 or more people. Whisper something complex that you have in writing into the ear of one person. Have them repeat it to the person on the left as a whisper til it gets back to you. By the time it gets back, it will most likely not resemble what you said at all. This happens virtually without exception.

That's why oral traditions are not a good means of transmitting ideas and that's why we needed writing. Nowadays we have videos and audio recordings, so maybe we can dispense with writing now, but then, it was crucial.
I just love the way you atheists are so logical about everything. I can almost see the wheels turning in your head. You're very analytical in your thought process. lol It's very cool. I didn't say oral traditions were perfect. Nothing is perfect. But just because it has flaws doesn't mean it doesn't work at all. It's great that we've been able to advance as a society like that. I remember that game. We called it "telephone". It was a lot of fun.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#5030 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>It's exactly right. If it were wrong, we would all be of the same religion.
We would never be in the same group of anything.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#5031 Feb 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
How many times should someone have to present you with the evidence that you just toss out?
I don't play those games. I'm not here to covert you or anyone. You along with everyone else on these threads were given the same opportunity to take care of your soul, you turned that down, that's your call. Have a nice life.
IOW, you don't have any evidence at all that god exists. If you did, you'd post it.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#5032 Feb 1, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>I have, and their evidence sounds just like the evidence Christians present for their deity.

Imagine that.

However, I gotta admit, the Hindu could teach the Christian a thing or two about circular reasoning.

They are masters of that. Pretty good at the 'word salad sentences', too.
Why would you insult the good people of the Hindu faith behind their backs?

Does it make you feel superior?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#5033 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>I'm surprised it doesn't bother you.

Josephus supposedly mentions
Jupiter
Hercules
and Jesus (this part was most likely forged, but we can pretend it wasn't for now)

as real persons. So your claim is that because Josephus mentioned him, then he must be real. But then he also mentions Jupiter and Hercules ..... should we pray to them too based on this "evidence"?

It's about the quality of your evidence. If you don't believe it has any quality to it, why should we?
I know that in your mind, you're trying to prove a point. But in my mind, I'm just having a conversation. I'm not here to prove a point. Nor am I looking for evidence. Because I know that science will never be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that God exists or doesn't exist. There is no mathematical equation that will ever prove or disprove the existence of God. I get the questioning things bit. How else are we ever gonna learn anything? I just think you're going about it the wrong way. I think your analytical minds are overbaking it. It's not the quest for proof of the existence of God (even if only to try and disprove it), I don't think, that's the problem. It's the way you go about it that I think is the issue. Let's be honest. If science could prove or disprove beyond a shadow of a doubt that God does or doesn't exist, don't you think someone would have done it by now? Or at least come close? Be it far from me to tell anyone how to do anything. I'm only stating my own humble opinion. I don't care if others choose to believe in Hercules or Zeus or Krishna or whoever. Their beliefs don't affect me one bit. I don't feel threatened by them at all. I sure as hell don't judge em for it. I just don't believe that way myself.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#5034 Feb 1, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe that anybody has the right to use their beliefs as a weapon to hurt others. In fact, my God teaches me to love my fellow man as I love myself. Any "Christian" using their beliefs as a weapon is not honoring the Word of God. They are abusing it. Blame them. Not the system of beliefs. You have every right to decide what exactly you believe. Not believing in something doesn't automatically make it a myth.
It's not my lack of belief that makes the stories myth. The creation story in genesis has day and night along with growing plants before there is a sun. So, that's clearly a myth. The story of Noah's Ark is so absurd, I doubt it was meant to be taken literally. It's clearly a myth.
01Justsayin wrote:
I'm sure it originated somewhere. Although, I do think people have false beliefs. Or misinterpretations thereof. Just because someone stands behind the pulpit doesn't mean they are potentially any less misguided. You have to discern that for yourself.
Yes, the myths originated somewhere, but they are still myths. There might be a bit of truth behind some of them, maybe someone found the ruins of a city, and that's the basis of the Sodom and Gomorrah myth.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#5035 Feb 1, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>There is no verifiable evidence for the existence of God. Which one were you talking about anyway? Man has created many gods in his own image. http://www.godchecker.com
"Evolutionists generally believe that although the spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter was a highly improbable event, the amount of time available is long enough to overcome this problem. This fallacy is because they (and most of us, really) just haven’t gotten around to some actual calculating on some of these problems.
The difficult thing is to conceive the size of some of the figures obtained. James F. Coppedge in the bookEvolution: Possible or Impossible? has given some fascinating examples, one of which is here presented. Consider first this statement from the evolutionist George Wald writing on The Origin of Life in the Scientific American (1954):
Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless there. Given so much time, the “impossible” becomes possible; the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait; time itself performs the miracles.
Now using Coppedge’s figures, let’s take a look at the time it would take for one simple gene to arrange itself by chance. Remember, natural selection cannot operate until a self-replicating system is produced. Of course, this gene by itself is still only a dead molecule in the absence of other genes and other complex chemicals all perfectly arranged in time and space. Nevertheless, let us use as many sets as there are atoms in the universe. Let us give chance the unbelievable number of attempts of eight trillion tries per second in each set! At this speed on average it would take 10^147 years to obtain just one stable gene. What does this number really mean? Let’s look at Coppedge’s example; assume we have an amoeba—and let’s assume that this little creature is given the task of carrying matter, one atom at a time from one edge of the universe to the other (though to be about thirty billion light years in diameter). Let’s further assume that this amoeba moves at the incredible slow pace of one Angstrom until (about the diameter of a hydrogen atom) every fifteen billion years (this is the assumed age of the universe assigned by many evolutionists). How much matter could this amoeba carry in this time calculated to arrange just one usable gene by chance? The answer is that he would be able to carry 2 x 10^21 complete universes!
This means that all the people living on earth, man, woman and child, counting day and night, would be counting for five thousand years just to count the number of entire universes which this amoeba would have transported across a distance of thirty billion light years, one atom at a time.
Coppedge’s book makes fascinating reading in other respects and is one of the few works that really comes to grips with this matter of molecular biology and probability mathematics.
Evolutionists would have us believe that modern molecular biology lends its support to their world view, but the more information comes to hand, the more preposterous the whole idea of a naturalistic origin of life becomes."

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v...

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
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 min Aura Mytha 231,834
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 11 min Gillette 876
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 28 min Morse 16
Siro is writing a new book 6 hr thetruth 5
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... 8 hr P_Smith 1
Why the Internet is slowly strangling religion 8 hr P_Smith 1
Reza Aslan: Sam Harris and "New Atheists" aren'... 11 hr P_Smith 1

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE