How about athiesm?

[putis]

Everyone reading this should join the religion group.

http://www.zuneboards.com/forums/pro...editusergroups

[sorrow]

First of all, i need to say two things: i'm going to [try] and keep this post short due to the massive research paper that i have due tomorrow afternoon. Secondly, i'm not joining the religious group for a couple of reasons.. mostly because i'm a) not religious, and b) studying abroad next semester and will have rather limited access to the internet.

Originally Posted by wizardmt70

Here is my view on science and The Bible (which is where my belief in God and ultimately Jesus Christ stems from)...

Science continues to change and evolve. A method used for many years can be found to be flawed by a new more effective method. Not that science isn't useful or beneficial but it is flawed.

The Bible, despite popular cultural belief, continues to be proven correct. Now me, being a Christian, I already believe that the Bible is the correct and infallable word of God. I don't need science to prove that but if it helps non-believers see the truth then great. You, being an atheist, have to rely on science because you have nothing else. I personally see this as flawed logic simply because science is so often changing and evolving while God is God, never changing always the same.

Saying that i "have to rely on science" is terribly inaccurate. I don't rely on anything, be it science, faith, or human stupidity -- although i think a lot of people would agree that the last of those three options is the most consistently available! :p In regards to "having nothing else," thats incorrect as well: i have faith in not only science, but also general belief and understanding of the ever-changing world around me, which brings me to my next point. You talk about God never changing etc like its a good thing.. yet, have you ever had anything in your life that hasn't changed in some way? I think using the steadfastness of God / religion is actually a blow to religion, not a bonus.

You quoted Mr. Dawkins as saying...

I'm simply saying that this statement is false based on my own testimony. I know several other people who's testimonies would also cause this statement to be false. Therefore Mr. Dawkins is either wrong in his thinking or making a very dangerous generality about the Christian faith. I view either one of these as dangerous because he is mis-leading people.

First of all, i have to point out that saying i "quoted" is incorrect. I was pointing out a very rough idea of Dawkins. If i were quoting him, it would have been much more eloquent, well grounded and backed, and probably a hell of a lot more efficient at making my (his) point.
That said, having you and several other people disagreeing with him / me is all fine and dandy -- but in no way proves him wrong. I can say that i know plenty of people who have shed their religious ties, but that doesn't necessarily make him right either.

I was merely trying to make the point that without God there is no Atheist because there is nothing to deny or contradict or to not believe in. Sorry if this is muddying the water then we can just drop it.

On this, i am once again going with what Putis said: atheism is belief in lack of anything to believe in, not specific disbelief in something that may or may not exist... and once again, he said it better than me ; )

Oh, and this:

When people die, their bodies decompose, a very simple fact; god isn't involved.

made me laugh.. and i definitely agree with that too. As for the spirit, mind, whatever you want to call it; anything could happen, or nothing could happen. No one knows, and no one can prove anything anyways..

something to ponder....

now this is no reason to believe in God, which leads to accepting Christ but just something to hopefully make you think.

If you are right and there is no God and I die then what happens.... nothing.

If I am right and there is a God and you die then what happens....

you owe it to yourselves to examine every statement that is said against the existence of God. Don't just take someone else thoughts and make them your own. They may be wrong.

I have the same responsibility as a Christian. I have to examine every teaching and everything said to make sure it is Truth. I believe in God and I believe that He sent His only Son to die on the cross for my Salvation based on the things that I have experienced in my life that say to me that He is alive and in charge. I don't base my belief on what I've heard or was taught as a child.

Thats pretty interesting you bring this up, because i mentioned almost the same exact thing to a Mormon friend in my math class this morning -- right after making my last post And i definitely agree with you on it: if i die and there is a hell? Looks like i'm SOL. Granted, if i die and there isn't a hell, then no harm done. But at this point my life i can safely say that if i die, and there does happen to be a heaven or hell, i probably would end up regretting it for eternity and all that, but i can't see myself asking for forgiveness -- i'm too damn stubborn

And i'm glad that you base your faith off of belief in the Bible and God's word as being the Truth.. after this ongoing debate, if i found out you just went to church every now and then, and called yourself a Christian, but couldn't quote any of the bible... i might actually get mad at you! :p

Also, in regards to Rock4Christ's post, thats a great point as well. If i die and find out that Christian beliefs were true all along.. whoa. But if i die and find out that Buddhist views were right all along.. thats a whole different ball game. That is one thing that has always irked me about Christianity, granted i don't know all that much about it... but as Einstein once said:

Originally Posted by Albert Einstein

I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature.

From here

And while i don't agree with all of his views (or maybe even a lot of them), i must agree that the concept of a god who rewards for good and punishes evil.. there is something inherently wrong with that if you ask me; we all know how bothersome spoiled children are..

Next in line for my longer than intended post / procrastination is Gold.N.God. I would have to say i agree (for the most part): isn't the bible being proven wrong? A great example is a study that Richard Dawkins cited (granted, its not proving the Bible wrong, but you'll get the point: ) a group of test subjects were chosen, all who were experiencing the same medical procedure, some kind of surgery is all i can remember. There were three groups: the control group of not-prayed for subjects, the experiment group of prayed for but not aware of it subjects, and finally a group who was prayed for, and was aware of it. In the long run, the test concluded something like this: the people not being prayed for were just as well off as those being prayed for, and the differences between the two was so small it was counted out. But the group that knew they were being prayed for... actually had the worst luck of them all. As Dawkins points out, this can be disputed by the idea that they thought "Oh dear, i'm so bad off they need to pray for me?" or whatever.. but you get the idea i hope.

Oh, and finally... Dead Jim, all i want to know about you is: What do you do?
Sounds pretty interesting in it's own right -- and i'm glad of your post too, because it reminds me to point out something very key in all my stances / points / arguments: I am in no way a good "source of information" for this argument. I'm not even 100 pages into The God Delusion due to lack of time, and haven't attended any type of church in many years.. so yeah, thats my belated disclaimer ; )

[EndUnknown]

Question for all the atheists:
suggested reading on your point of view? I want to know all I can about the various religions, or lack therein in this case.

[wizardmt70]

Originally Posted by sorrow

Next in line for my longer than intended post / procrastination is Gold.N.God. I would have to say i agree (for the most part): isn't the bible being proven wrong? A great example is a study that Richard Dawkins cited (granted, its not proving the Bible wrong, but you'll get the point: ) a group of test subjects were chosen, all who were experiencing the same medical procedure, some kind of surgery is all i can remember. There were three groups: the control group of not-prayed for subjects, the experiment group of prayed for but not aware of it subjects, and finally a group who was prayed for, and was aware of it. In the long run, the test concluded something like this: the people not being prayed for were just as well off as those being prayed for, and the differences between the two was so small it was counted out. But the group that knew they were being prayed for... actually had the worst luck of them all. As Dawkins points out, this can be disputed by the idea that they thought "Oh dear, i'm so bad off they need to pray for me?" or whatever.. but you get the idea i hope.

Once again... don't believe everything you hear or read in a book. Take the time to do the research.

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...l+group+prayer

I only read three of these and all three said something different. Proves absolutely nothing.

My personal Story... (keep this short)

Diagnosed with a cyst on my thyroid (2 different medical test).
Request pray from the Elders in my Church.

James 5:13-15 (New International Version)

The Prayer of Faith
13Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. 14Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven.

Follow up exam a week later... no cyst.

Proof enough for me.

POSTS MERGED

Originally Posted by gold.n.god

I must be one of those people who thinks that the bible is being proven wrong....

Wasn't the storys of Mosses and Noah's Arch proven implausible. I know that they can't be proven completly wrong because none of us were around back then to see it for ourselfs. However, the fact that there was no evidence is enough to make something implausible.

Also, how can someone find herd and fit two of every animal in the world in one boat?

And who's to say that the bible never changes, if it never changes why is there an old testimate and a new one? And why were there a whole bunch of books of the bible left out?

Which story of Moses? Crossing the Red Sea: http://www.arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.htm

Noahs Arch: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c013.html

I said God never changes and as for the bible... I hesitate to say that this never changes because I'll get the standard statments about translations, inaccuracies, etc... I do believe that God's word is infallible and needs to be studied often, including going back to the original greek/hebrew text that it was written in to begin with. As far as inaccuracies or contradictions... for every atheist or agnostic that cries out about these, I can point you to a Christian website that says the opposite. This is a never ending debate that we surely won't solve here. My belief is:

2 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

You can read all about why there are certain gospels that were left out of the bible on the internet, but primarily because most of these were thougth to be false. I believe that if God wanted these in there then they would be there.

POSTS MERGED

Originally Posted by sorrow

but as Einstein once said:

Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish.
Albert Einstein

My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.
Albert Einstein

From here: http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Albert_Einstein/

"I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details."

"God does not care about our mathematical difficulties. He integrates empirically."

From here: http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshir...einQuotes.html

"I should've been a plumber."
- Albert Einstein

from here: http://www.some-guy.com/quotes/einstein.html

my point being...

The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery every day. Never lose a holy curiosity.
Albert Einstein

[dead jim]

Originally Posted by rock4christ

Question for all the atheists:
suggested reading on your point of view? I want to know all I can about the various religions, or lack therein in this case.

you can check out george smith's Atheism: The Case Against God. i'm not suggesting that it's the greatest book, but it will give you a fairly straightforward introduction to some of the major arguments. of course you could always just pick up an intro to philosophy textbook with a phil of religion section and check it out. i use l. p. pojman's Philosophy: The Quest for Truth in my class. that's not to suggest i agree wholeheartedly with pojman's presentations, but it will give you the basic ideas.
it's important to understand exactly what the arguments for a god say. some atheists will simply say they are unconvinced by such arguments, and, in the face of unconvincing arguments and, hence, no positive reason to believe in some god, they don't believe.

[wizardmt70]

Originally Posted by dead jim

you can check out george smith's Atheism: The Case Against God.

you should also check out Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel

On Strobel's website, there is also a great interview with Dr. Antony Flew, an 81 year old, former atheist, author, and debater that recently became a theist. ; )

[EndUnknown]

Originally Posted by wizardmt70

you should also check out Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel

On Strobel's website, there is also a great interview with Dr. Antony Flew, an 81 year old, former atheist, author, and debater that recently became a theist. ; )

read that-both full and student, never visited the site tho

[amf6180]

Originally Posted by wizardmt70

Actually.... Science has determined themselves that carbon dating is a flawed method determining somethings age.

Carbon-14 dating is flawed but it still give you a good date. the most it can be off is by about 10,000 years witch doesnt make a difference when you find a rock thats 300,000,000 years old

The earth being only 6,000 years old is completely bogus. I mean we have texts that are older than that (I forget there name) but they are there


Ok, I am an atheist and proud of it (was a christian till i was about 13 and could actually tell the difference between superstition and fact)
I love studying religion its really interesting to me im think about going to college for it im not sure yet.

I generally dont like religions people that much but i have a religus girlfreind so im a little more tolerant of them but still dont like them

http://www.evilbible.com/
Awesome site

http://www.godisimaginary.com/

Good site has alot of info

its has 50 reasons why god isn't real

[putis]

I merged out jim and I my posts to here.

..Didn't mean to get so off topic.

[sorrow]

Originally Posted by wizardmt70

Once again... don't believe everything you hear or read in a book. Take the time to do the research.

Okay, i'm going to keep this really short because i don't have time to read everything that i have missed, but hopefully will tomorrow.

But i do have to post one response: You're telling me not to believe everything i hear or read in a book, while you (to some extent) dedicate your life to... the bible :confused: I mean, sure you can say that you have researched the bible and read all the other related books, etc.. but you're still trusting in books that for all we know, were initially written as a child's bedtime story..??

[wizardmt70]

amf6180 Quote:
Carbon-14 dating is flawed but it still give you a good date. the most it can be off is by about 10,000 years witch doesnt make a difference when you find a rock thats 300,000,000 years old

The earth being only 6,000 years old is completely bogus. I mean we have texts that are older than that (I forget there name) but they are there

Even Science related websites, say that C-14 dating is only good on stuff less than 50,000 yrs old, the rest is system of assumptions.

Name those texts and what method was used to date them please. Without fact... it's just hearsay.

Originally Posted by sorrow

Okay, i'm going to keep this really short because i don't have time to read everything that i have missed, but hopefully will tomorrow.

But i do have to post one response: You're telling me not to believe everything i hear or read in a book, while you (to some extent) dedicate your life to... the bible :confused: I mean, sure you can say that you have researched the bible and read all the other related books, etc.. but you're still trusting in books that for all we know, were initially written as a child's bedtime story..??

I've dedicated my life to Christ. I use the bible to get a clearer picture of who He is so that by better knowing him, I can have a better relationship with him.

To clarify my point... reading something and accepting it as truth is dangerous. You should study it, test it and put it into practice. I believe the Bible to be accurate because I've studied it, tested it and put it into my heart so that I may use the truths in there throughout my daily life. It has never let me down. Man and his theories have continually been a disappointment and let down. I’ve never seen an attack on the bible stand up but I have seen the bible stand up to many attacks. I believe the bible to be God-breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, (2 timothy 3:16).

[amf6180]

Originally Posted by wizardmt70

Even Science related websites, say that C-14 dating is only good on stuff less than 50,000 yrs old, the rest is system of assumptions.

Name those texts and what method was used to date them please. Without fact... it's just hearsay.

i dont have time to find the names of the texts right now but there are cave drawings dating back to around 8000 BC.


thats just one way of radioactive dating theres other kinds




Uranium-Thorium dating is an absolute dating technique which uses the properties of the radio-active half-life of Uranium-238 and Thorium-230. The half-life of uranium--238 is 4,470,000,000 years, that is, in that many years half of the original amount is still uranium- the other half has lost protons to form a different element which is more stable. The half-life of thorium-230 is only 75,380 years. When the amounts of uranium and thorium are compared an accurate estimation of the age of an object can be obtained.

There are various procedures which can be used with this dating technique. Two processes are Isotope Dilution Mass Spectrometry (IDMS), Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS) and IDMS-Thermal Ionization Mass Spectrometry (TIMS). For each process the IDMS uses an element specific resin to chemically separate the uranium and thorium and remove metals, the latest development for this process is U/teva.SPEC. For any process there must be correction for Thorium-232, the common thorium which is not radioactive. However, once the corrections are made the technique has been checked with Carbon-14 dating and has been found accurate.

Uranium-Thorium dating was first used on fossil bones in 1956, however, it had been used for dating wood before this. This dating technique has been used effectively on marine sediment, bone, wood, coral, stone and soil. One of the benefits of uranium-thorium dating is that the sample sizes can be less than 20 grams, in fact bone samples can be 3-5 grams for an accurate date.

One problem with the technique is the requirements for the object to be dated- it must take up uranium-238 and no thorium, then immediately be closed off so it would not be able to take in more. This is possible especially in caves, deep water and land fall areas.

<http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/archaeology/dating/uranium_dating.html>

[David]

Originally Posted by sorrow

Okay, i'm going to keep this really short because i don't have time to read everything that i have missed, but hopefully will tomorrow.

But i do have to post one response: You're telling me not to believe everything i hear or read in a book, while you (to some extent) dedicate your life to... the bible :confused: I mean, sure you can say that you have researched the bible and read all the other related books, etc.. but you're still trusting in books that for all we know, were initially written as a child's bedtime story..??

That last part isn't really true, some of the small stories were intended to be, but I think most of it is about jesus, and other stuff, like a history book. Of couse some one the stuff in there isn't really true, but just because some one the text was mislabled at truth doesn't mean that the whole thing was intended for bed time stories.

but yeah most of the little stories in there like Noah, and Moses, David and Goliath were definitely intended for children to read and find the moral in.

ok

about atheism like I said before
"there is no god" that's what atheists believe, there really isn't much more to it than that.

An atheist thinks that there is no god. that's all, nothing more.

I'm an atheist because I don't think that I god made the earth, and I think that most of the claims in the bible are fiction.

It may seem odd, but I think that religion is good for the world. Everything is the way it is now because of religion. The Constitution is based on Christian veiws. I don't think that we really need religion anymore, but it's still important for some people to be happy.

well... as for the "How about athiesm" ((spelled wrong btw) not to judge... I spell stuff wrong all the time.) Atheism is the belief that there is no God. Well, the definition is: the doctrine or belief that there is no God

there are more definitions, here are some
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...ition&ct=title

On a side note: I think I contradicted myself earlier on in my post, but that doesn't matter, opinions change.

[Stuart]

I am an athiest. I firmly believe that is there is no God or supreme being. I do believe in the big bang. I do believe in the theory of evolution.

Taken from a valuable source:

850,000,000 people around the world are Atheist, Agnostic or Non-Religious. That's more than 1 out of 10 people, making up the 4th largest belief group.

Statistics have shown that the more educated an individual, the less likely they are to be religious or believe in a god. 72% of the National Academy of Sciences members have a 'personal disbelief in god' and another 20% claim 'doubt or agnosticism'.

The Divorce rate among atheists and agnostics is 21% vs. 30% for Jews, 27%for Born again Christians, and 24% for other Christians.

Athieism is becoming more and more of a reality and people have the freedom to choose.