The Faith of Atheism

SurlyPIG · February 8, 2003

"I'm a Christian but I'm not religious."

Yeah ok there...

TMA_1 · February 8, 2003

you probably dont even know where the word religion came from or what it means. before saying that, you might want to check yourself. It could lead to embarressment. You would be surprised what a little studying can do. :)

SurlyPIG · February 8, 2003

I know exactly what it means.

1 : relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality or deity <a religious person> <religious attitudes>

Unless you don't consider God an ultimate deity, I would think that you're a religious.

People on this forum that support atheism have gone to pretty biased sites for info. "atheism.com"??? lol

You mean www.atheism.org ? Edric posted that link. And I would count on it's accuracy 100 times over some place like www.chick.com or that Creation Science Evangelism sneezer uses that says "Earth can't be billions of years old 'cause the layer of dust on the moon is too thin." ROFL.

TMA_1 · February 8, 2003

religious comes from greek, and it translates to "Binding back" or "searching". As christians we dont do that. We dont try to reach for God, God comes to us. This has been said so many times and people wont ever get it.lol thats okay though, because I am so damn cool. and sexy! ;) lol

SurlyPIG · February 8, 2003

So? That meaning is obsolete. The Swastika was originally just a symbol of prosperity in the East.

TMA_1 · February 8, 2003

the meaning isnt obsolete, its people like you who are unaware of these things. it isnt an insult. it is just the truth. you need to accept that I have different opinions from you, and that I have good reason to have different beliefs than religion.

SurlyPIG · February 8, 2003

I challenge you to find any dictionary that will list your definition as more common than the one I posted. I didn't even see your ludacris definition at m-w. You are a Christian, so you are religious. Arguing pathetic, obsolete and ancient symantics won't change that.

TMA_1 · February 8, 2003

lol somebody is angry. ;)

It isnt up to this world to decide what christianity is. You may say I am playing semantics, but I say that I am on a different level than you. Your argument is incompatable. You are trying to prove something that isnt even going to change my opinion. so why try? :)

SurlyPIG · February 9, 2003

"I say that I am on a different level than you."

Ah yes, the ever-popular, "I am saved so I am better than you." arguement.

My point exactly. :)

TMA_1 · February 9, 2003

it has nothing to do with that. I meant I am thinking at a different level. ahh makes you feel better dont it? ;)

SurlyPIG · February 9, 2003

You're thinking on a different level? How's that? A RELIGIOUS level maybe? ;D

And you didn't get a single thing right about the word. Not only is the definition you suggested nowhere to be found but the word isn't even Greek.

Main Entry: 1re

sneezer3 · February 9, 2003

"I say that I am on a different level than you."
Ah yes, the ever-popular, "I am saved so I am better than you." arguement.
My point exactly. :)

lol, that isn't what he ment. most don't think that, we are all sinners one not better then the other, and last of all.

as for why i'm not religious by that term go to http://www.gospelcom.net/narramore/htbs.htm

SurlyPIG · February 9, 2003

What are you talking about? It's rare that I meet a Christian that doesn't think that way. It comes naturally with such strong, personal beliefs. Those who don't share them become inferior in the eyes of those who do. I'll bet at least half of the theists on this board think that way. Most of the people I know think that way. Even my teachers think that way.

And on "judgement day" I won't be able to argue because I won't exist because I'll be dead. Just like you on your day. ;)

Acriku · February 9, 2003

ACE I don't think it's a bother to try to explain. I don't understand TMA's "claim of not being religious" because he's using etymology from the greek language where it once probably meant, but now it means what Ace has said, for this is "english" a common language used through America and other countries.

emprworm · February 9, 2003

I meant natural in the sense that it did not occur as a result of the will of deity. Your arguement is absolutely sound. But equally sound, what if the same matter and energy that went into the big bang originated in this universe? Obviously, one tryind to disprove this will walk the origin trail and say "Well how did it just zap out of nowhere in that universe?" Perhaps it was a place where such bizzare and improbable things were possible, even regular...and coincidentally the next part of this quote will probably be exactly what you would have replied.

two things, Ace.

First, all of your "what if's" are just that....what if's. I, too, have a what if; "what if the universe is caused by God?" I am not slamming you for not believing in God, I am trying to point out that when atheists call theism irrational, they are exposing an immense double standard. You have no logical right to look at my belief about how this universe got here and call it irrational- the alternatives are as faith based as mine, and just as untouchable by natural science.

And as for ID, it is a theory that proposes option #1. Atheists want to be unfair and cowardly and force option #2 down our throats- I don't like that. Out of the three options, it is fair and logical to teach all of them and let the kids decide for themselves.

Edric O · February 9, 2003

What are you talking about? It's rare that I meet a Christian that doesn't think that way. It comes naturally with such strong, personal beliefs. Those who don't share them become inferior in the eyes of those who do. I'll bet at least half of the theists on this board think that way. Most of the people I know think that way. Even my teachers think that way.

You must not have met too many good Christians, then. Arrogance is one of the things Jesus was most opposed to.

nemafakei · February 9, 2003

Please refrain from the vast generalisations, everyone. Or at least temper them with reason.

And while religion does come from religare, to bind back, that is not what it means now in English in any sense (the closest the OED has is monastic, only one possible meaning)... besides which, you know exactly what people mean when they talk about being religious.

sneezer3 · February 9, 2003

And while religion does come from religare,

How do your pronounce that?

SurlyPIG · February 9, 2003

First, all of your "what if's" are just that....what if's. I, too, have a what if; "what if the universe is caused by God?" I am not slamming you for not believing in God, I am trying to point out that when atheists call theism irrational, they are exposing an immense double standard. You have no logical right to look at my belief about how this universe got here and call it irrational- the alternatives are as faith based as mine, and just as untouchable by natural science.

I understand that. But the distinguishing difference is that I take my "what if's" as just that, "what if's". I place no factual value on them whatsoever. Many people - theist and atheist alike - assume their theories or their ideas as fact. Some not only as fact, but as the fact; the highest form of knowledge and "enlightenment" there is. Like many on this board have said, they will die and kill for that perceived fact.

And as for ID, it is a theory that proposes option #1. Atheists want to be unfair and cowardly and force option #2 down our throats- I don't like that. Out of the three options, it is fair and logical to teach all of them and let the kids decide for themselves.

When did they start teaching them at all? At least where I live, I don't think we even touched on the origins of the universe. They taught the big bang (as a theory no less) and how it was the leading scientific theory of HOW the universe came into existence based on astronomical data etc. They never said WHY and from WHAT the universe came.

They also taught evolution. Evolution on a biological scale is factually sound (ie Darwin's Theory {soon to become a Law of science}). You can experiment with generations of organisms off all types in isolated environments, and the overall direction of the species will absolutely never break away from the principles of Natural Selection. Most people see this as no biggie, since it doesn't apply to humans, but at the time of this discovery it was a very controversial issue. When Darwin discovered this he kept it under wraps for more than twenty years because it went against the belief that God created all life and decided its fate. But twenty years later, someone else came up with the same theory. Darwin found him and they compared data, and they found the same conclusions again. Being the nice guy that he was, this other dude (whom ironically I can't remember the name of), after seeing Darwin's twenty-year-old work, allowed Darwin to recieve credit for discovering the principle.

To this day, nobody in the scientific community has been able to find anything that could even hold up a candle to Natural Selection. That's why it's soon to become a Law.

Acriku · February 9, 2003

Alfred Wallace :) Interesting how two men of reason come to almost the identical conclusion.

SurlyPIG · February 9, 2003

Yeah thats the guy. Two Christian men nonetheless, reputable enough to bring the truth against the status quo.

emprworm · February 10, 2003

I understand that. But the distinguishing difference is that I take my "what if's" as just that, "what if's". I place no factual value on them whatsoever. Many people - theist and atheist alike - assume their theories or their ideas as fact.

You mean kind of like you saying the theory of evolution is "fact?" so what? They believe the Bible is true with the same degree and certainty that you believe it is false. You do not have a "default", neutral veiw of the Bible- you directly believe it is false. And? Big deal. I'd rather a sincere person who drew conclusions about things then a superficial waffling Clintonite. I believe the universe is caused, I believe this firmly. I came to this conclusion through logic and my perceptions of the universe around me. I concluded this. What's it to you? If you don't like that, well, too bad. I wouldn't ask anyone to change their views on account that I don't like it. I know I cannot prove my view, and I disrespect any atheist telling me my view is irrational when theirs is grounded in faith as well. No one has an exclusive right on science.

When did they start teaching them at all? At least where I live, I don't think we even touched on the origins of the universe. They taught the big bang (as a theory no less) and how it was the leading scientific theory of HOW the universe came into existence based on astronomical data etc. They never said WHY and from WHAT the universe came.

I would be highly surprised if anyone taught you ID. If they did, you might not be so adamant in the "fact" of evolution.

Evolution on a biological scale is factually sound (ie Darwin's Theory {soon to become a Law of science}).

another thread, and not factually sound. take this line of discussion to the other thread please, thanks- i want to stick to the origins of the universe, not the origins of the species.

You can experiment with generations of organisms off all types in isolated environments, and the overall direction of the species will absolutely never break away from the principles of Natural Selection. Most people see this as no biggie, since it doesn't apply to humans, but at the time of this discovery it was a very controversial issue. When Darwin discovered this he kept it under wraps for more than twenty years because it went against the belief that God created all life and decided its fate. But twenty years later, someone else came up with the same theory. Darwin found him and they compared data, and they found the same conclusions again. Being the nice guy that he was, this other dude (whom ironically I can't remember the name of), after seeing Darwin's twenty-year-old work, allowed Darwin to recieve credit for discovering the principle.

irrelevant, another topic. no comments.

To this day, nobody in the scientific community has been able to find anything that could even hold up a candle to Natural Selection. That's why it's soon to become a Law.

another thread, but for your information, I suggest you click here

if you want to respond to that, please ensure your response is in that thread since it is another topic, thanks.

Sign In

The Faith of Atheism

Recommended Posts

SurlyPIG

TMA_1

SurlyPIG

TMA_1

SurlyPIG

TMA_1

SurlyPIG

TMA_1

SurlyPIG

TMA_1

SurlyPIG

sneezer3

SurlyPIG

Acriku

emprworm

Edric O

nemafakei

sneezer3

SurlyPIG

Acriku

SurlyPIG

emprworm

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information