Why Atheism Will Replace Religion

Aug 27, 2012 Full story: News24 14,385

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: Mar 11

United States

#8228 Apr 5, 2013
Some if the arguments and talking points are taken directly from creationist websites, and you know it.

Again you were the one who attacked me for my statement that death is a natural thing so that being said we clearly see your level of reason.

That being verified, how is atheism a religion again?

As I have said before I am as open to the assertion of a god as I am the kraken. Do you see any reason why any supernatural god deserves more consideration than the kraken?

And again how am I hell bent on atheism? Atheism is merely not actively believing in a god. It is the reasonable default position as you have clearly said in your own words. That is kind of like saying someone is hell bent on homeostasis isn't it?
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>Ok this is actually getting really annoying.

How have I used ANY creationist talking points when I openly denounce both creationist ideas and Christianity?

Just because I am open to the idea that PERHAPS humans have got it WRONG ENTIRELY and that no religion or faith (including atheism) is correct and we just haven't coined what the correct religion is, DOES NOT MEAN I AM CREATIONIST. I am saying that we also have no proof that a God, or at least spiritual being, does not exist, and in all fairness people from every culture throughout time have at least devised some form of religion / afterlife concept which holds VERY SIMILAR THEMES in each single one. I.e bad guy devil, Good God, heaven, Hell, after lives etc.

Athiesm is a default position I agree with you, which is why 99.9% of the time I agree with you (despite your repeated insistance that you are against me). However, until we can physically revive someone from the dead and ask them about their experience, we will never know for sure whether God or any after life exists or not.

Why are you so closed to the idea that there could be SOMETHING out there. Because we don't know for sure that it is a made up assertion, and while all current religions may be incorrect or at most laughable, there isn't any reason why we shouldn't be open to the idea that there could be something.

"Show me evidence of God", EXACTLY, this is my point, we can't prove or disprove it either way, all our theories about how the universe began are either scientific or religious. The idea of a big bang if you go back a step further makes the concept hard to believe - where did the protons come from to begin with? The matter couldn't have ALWAYS been there could it?

I think you are reasonable to an extent, it would just be nice if you had a more open mind rather than hell bent on atheism.

“Can't help being fabulous”

Since: Dec 10

Sparkle <3

#8229 Apr 5, 2013
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me jump in here if I may...
I see your point, but I do not consider myself agnostic. Since there is no more reason to believe that any particular made up god is any more real than any other made up god throughout history, or that any other made up thingy(unicorns, centaur, etc...) are any more real or have any more evidence to support them, by being agnostic on one, would almost require me to be agnostic on anything!! If someone claims that there are sock gremlins, I would have to be agnostic on sock gremlins simply because I can not 100% rule them out!! The fact that a whole bunch of people believe in a particular thing(god), does not give that thing any more credability. There is as much evidence for a god as there is for a pink, flying unicorn. And I am not agnostic on either.:)
I see your point,

However it doesn't quite work like that for the majoriy of agnostics :)

My agnosticism is based upon evidence and fact.

I believe in evolution because of how likely it is and because of how obvious it is, and that we see it in day to day life, therefore I completely rule out creationism.

I've ruled out modern religions and ancient religions because I don't believe that any God would base the purpose of the universe around one tiny planet or one very simplistic organism. To think that would just be arrogant.

However,

Just becaus I am very 'athiest minded' to all of the worlds religions, and because I believe there PROBABLY ISN'T a 'God', doesn't mean i'm completely closed minded to the idea. What if we're all wrong? What if there is a flying pink unicorn? I can't prove it either way.

I don't accept the fact there could be a God just because a bunch of people believe in one, that would give credability to the idea that just because Joe Bloggs jumps off a cliff I should aswell.

I give some credibility to the idea of God, in the same way I do to other philosophies, as it is a reasonable idea to presume that we are here and conscious for a reason. For instance; why are WE here? Why am I ME? Other than the obvious reasons of biological interactions and mixture of genotypes giving the resultant phenotype.

“Can't help being fabulous”

Since: Dec 10

Sparkle <3

#8230 Apr 5, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Some if the arguments and talking points are taken directly from creationist websites, and you know it.
<quoted text>
Again you are being nothing but irritating.

State exactly what arguments I have used that are "creationist".

I have said REPEATEDLY on this forum that I DO NOT BELIEVE IN CREATIONISM, and that I DENOUNCE CHRISTIANITY AND THE IDEA OF A CHRISTIAN GOD IN GENERAL.

“Can't help being fabulous”

Since: Dec 10

Sparkle <3

#8231 Apr 5, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
And again how am I hell bent on atheism? Atheism is merely not actively believing in a god. It is the reasonable default position as you have clearly said in your own words. That is kind of like saying someone is hell bent on homeostasis isn't it?
<quoted text>
Apologies my wording probably wasn't clear.

What I mean is that you are acting like your opinion is the only one that is correct and you make a mockery of anyone who thinks differently, hence your statement calling me a child and offering tuition.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#8232 Apr 5, 2013
Stop avoiding my questions and I will, fair enough?
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>Again you are being nothing but irritating.

State exactly what arguments I have used that are "creationist".

I have said REPEATEDLY on this forum that I DO NOT BELIEVE IN CREATIONISM, and that I DENOUNCE CHRISTIANITY AND THE IDEA OF A CHRISTIAN GOD IN GENERAL.

Since: Dec 10

Orefield, PA

#8233 Apr 5, 2013
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>
I see your point,
However it doesn't quite work like that for the majoriy of agnostics :)
My agnosticism is based upon evidence and fact.
I believe in evolution because of how likely it is and because of how obvious it is, and that we see it in day to day life, therefore I completely rule out creationism.
I've ruled out modern religions and ancient religions because I don't believe that any God would base the purpose of the universe around one tiny planet or one very simplistic organism. To think that would just be arrogant.
However,
Just becaus I am very 'athiest minded' to all of the worlds religions, and because I believe there PROBABLY ISN'T a 'God', doesn't mean i'm completely closed minded to the idea. What if we're all wrong? What if there is a flying pink unicorn? I can't prove it either way.
I don't accept the fact there could be a God just because a bunch of people believe in one, that would give credability to the idea that just because Joe Bloggs jumps off a cliff I should aswell.
I give some credibility to the idea of God, in the same way I do to other philosophies, as it is a reasonable idea to presume that we are here and conscious for a reason. For instance; why are WE here? Why am I ME? Other than the obvious reasons of biological interactions and mixture of genotypes giving the resultant phenotype.
I understand your point, and even agree to a certain extent. My point was simply that I would not call myself an agnostic for .0001% of possibility. It seems pretty obvious to me that you are WAAAAY over toward the atheist side of the equation.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#8234 Apr 5, 2013
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand your point, and even agree to a certain extent. My point was simply that I would not call myself an agnostic for .0001% of possibility. It seems pretty obvious to me that you are WAAAAY over toward the atheist side of the equation.
I agree. I think of myself as the agnostic type. Which I think more is about saying that we cannot know if there is a God or not, cause you cannot prove or disprove something which is a) invisible, and b) silent.

Some days I can be more of a deist, and like to think that something may exist out there, and others hear something on the news or whatever, and think that there cannot possibly be a God.

What I am confident on after a lot of research is that the Abrahamic Christian God as described in the Bible is man cruel and made.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#8235 Apr 5, 2013
typo man made

“Can't help being fabulous”

Since: Dec 10

Sparkle <3

#8236 Apr 5, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Stop avoiding my questions and I will, fair enough?
<quoted text>
Sure.

So; how am I being a creationist when i've openly said that i'm against the whole concept of creationism?

“Can't help being fabulous”

Since: Dec 10

Sparkle <3

#8237 Apr 5, 2013
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand your point, and even agree to a certain extent. My point was simply that I would not call myself an agnostic for .0001% of possibility. It seems pretty obvious to me that you are WAAAAY over toward the atheist side of the equation.
Fair enough
Thinking

Staines, UK

#8238 Apr 5, 2013
Where do you place yourself on the Dawkins scale of belief?
I'm a 6 (or 6 point something :D).

http://christophersisk.com/dawkins-belief-sca...
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>
Fair enough

Since: Dec 10

Orefield, PA

#8239 Apr 5, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. I think of myself as the agnostic type. Which I think more is about saying that we cannot know if there is a God or not, cause you cannot prove or disprove something which is a) invisible, and b) silent.
Some days I can be more of a deist, and like to think that something may exist out there, and others hear something on the news or whatever, and think that there cannot possibly be a God.
What I am confident on after a lot of research is that the Abrahamic Christian God as described in the Bible is man cruel and made.
Agreed.
As I said before, I consider myself an atheist simply because I have seen zero proof of a god. This doesn't mean that I am not open to some evidence if it is ever presented. The reason I shy away from the whole agnostic thing, is because I don't feel I should call myself agnostic about a god that is as unproven as little green goblins. If I say that I am agnostic about a god that I have zero proof of, than I would have to say I am agnostic about every crackpot theory/imagined thing that comes up.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#8240 Apr 5, 2013
After you called me an idiot or did you forget that? If you live in a glass don't be throwing rocks.

My opinion is backed by observable demonstrable fact and I have no reason to be shy or apologetic about that. So if an atheist dares to express their opinion they are being religious?

This is what I find interesting, people it seems want atheists to just be quiet, don't make waves, you may upset a theist and so on.

All gods were created by ancient people who sometimes felt alone, scared, awestruck or just didn't have the resources available to explain the world around them. It was a comforting measure. Soon though it was used by those seeking power as a control device over their fellow man. As time and innovations progress the gods have shrunk more and more in our collective eye. We as a species are growing up and the time has come to put away childish things.
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>Apologies my wording probably wasn't clear.

What I mean is that you are acting like your opinion is the only one that is correct and you make a mockery of anyone who thinks differently, hence your statement calling me a child and offering tuition.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#8241 Apr 5, 2013
Now go back and answer my questions.... Waiting.
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>Sure.

So; how am I being a creationist when i've openly said that i'm against the whole concept of creationism?

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#8242 Apr 5, 2013
Norman or Harry Osborne?:)
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>Agreed.
As I said before, I consider myself an atheist simply because I have seen zero proof of a god. This doesn't mean that I am not open to some evidence if it is ever presented. The reason I shy away from the whole agnostic thing, is because I don't feel I should call myself agnostic about a god that is as unproven as little green goblins. If I say that I am agnostic about a god that I have zero proof of, than I would have to say I am agnostic about every crackpot theory/imagined thing that comes up.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#8243 Apr 5, 2013
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>
The pictures that Hubble shot are beautiful and stunning.
I agree with you, it's highly unlikely that any omnipotent being created this universe and all it's wonders, particularly considering how arrogant human religions are (where God is only concerned with the human 'soul').
Personally I believe that it's 99.9% likely there is nothing out there, and that there isn't some flying spaghetti monster in the sky ruling over us all. But because i'm unable to scientifically disprove it, there is always the 0.01% chance for error, hence my agnosticism.
In modern day, science has given us more reasons to doubt religion and think of the after-life and God to be unlikely concepts. However, we haven't yet disproved them, so it would be foolish to laugh at the idea completely.
Plus, many scientific thoughts have been wrong in the past.
I guess there are degrees of wrongness. These aren't my words but I think they put it well...

Suppose you have a length of wood and you want to measure it. First, you use a yard stick with markings only on the feet, and find that the wood is 7 feet long. Then you decide to use a better ruler and find the wood is 7 feet 2 inches long. Then you decide to use a better one and find it is 7 feet 2 1/4 inches long. You can never reach the truth (the exact size) because you don't have a prefect measuring device, but are all the measurements *false*? No, they are better and better approximations to the truth.

This is how science works: you figure things out at one level of accuracy and see how far you can understand things there. Then, after you get better instruments and better techniques, you look again and see if what you previously did works at the new level of accuracy.

Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. If it doesn't, you have to modify your ideas, but the lower level of accuracy still works! So rather than being completely wrong, the older scientific ideas are actually just good approximations and have been refined by new abilities.

This has happened multiple times in science. Newtonian physics gives a very good description of how planets move, how buildings stand, and many phenomena at the ordinary level of human existence. But, as we probed deeper, we found that it doesn't work for very small things (like atoms and smaller) or very fast things (close to the speed of light) or very strong gravitational fields (like around black holes). So, it had to be refined to account for these new observations. This lead to relativity and quantum mechanics.

Did this make Newton's theories *false*? In one sense, yes, but in a practical sense not. We still use Newtonian physics to send probes to the moon, to design cars, etc, because it is an extremely good *approximation*.

This is the strength of science: it can adjust to new and more refined observations while preserving the work previously done. We can realize that we *never* have the exact truth, but can find better and better approximations as we study more.

Religion, on the other hand, claims an absolute truth at the beginning. It either ignores new evidence, or modifies its beliefs (silently!) while claiming nothing has changed. By refusing to acknowledge ignorance and adapt to new information, it becomes dogmatic and dangerous. By insisting that all those who believe other things are evil, it, itself, becomes evil. By claiming certain knowledge, it gives up on the path of wisdom all together.

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#8244 Apr 5, 2013
Kesla15 wrote:
<quoted text>Apologies my wording probably wasn't clear.

What I mean is that you are acting like your opinion is the only one that is correct and you make a mockery of anyone who thinks differently, hence your statement calling me a child and offering tuition.
And calls people trannies and she-males. Very immature person.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#8245 Apr 5, 2013
Educated What wrote:
<quoted text>
And calls people trannies and she-males. Very immature person.
not as immature as the person who believes that jesus rode on the backs of dinosaurs.

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#8246 Apr 5, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>not as immature as the person who believes that jesus rode on the backs of dinosaurs.
Lets get things corrected here. I believe your mother rode a donkey and you were born. Now get it right next time.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#8247 Apr 5, 2013
Educated What wrote:
<quoted text>
Lets get things corrected here.
So remove the parts of the bible that say hateful things about atheists.

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.

Pagan/Wiccan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Who Is Allah? (Aug '07) 1 hr Dragnet52 203,462
Bloomfield woman behind Ten Commandments monume... Oct 10 Liam R 3
Wiccan Arrested on Child Rape Charges (Apr '10) Oct 9 Lee County NC 46
I...(gulp) am a Pagan Agnostic Taoist Sep 28 Ol Fuddy Duddy 2
Respecting belief: why should you? And why shou... Sep 21 thetruth 21
Pagan caught performing naked ritual with teena... (Nov '12) Sep '14 Kathwynn 14
Who exactly was Gjoub, and should I trust him? (Mar '09) Sep '14 Kathwynn 503

Pagan/Wiccan People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE