A case for religion, and against AA.

[norseamd]

much of atheism became a religion when they started preaching and then they unified and consolidated their beliefs and then they started to rant against other philoshophies and religions even if they were not abrahamic

 

[norseamd]

not all atheists are religious nor is atheism defined by this pseudo-religion of atheism

 

[norseamd]

Nope, just atheists because they claim to be the complete opposite of religion, which they are clearly not. Book club members etc, are not anti non-book clubists like atheist groups are anti-religious. I wouldn't consider atheism a religion if they stopped proselytizing their non-belief. I have yet to see a book club write best-selling books explaining the "Non-book club delusion", or "the end of non-book clubs". Proselytizing, forming groups for the advancement of atheism, and creating channels to advance their cause makes them indistinguishable from your typical evangelist.

odd that i only read your first sentance and then made my comment and then i ended up writing the exact same occurance

 

[norseamd]

Really? You've never heard of groups that try and get more people to read? Ok, so in your world, any group of like minded people that encourage others to join their group are a religion? Edit - Your post is confusing, are you talking about book club members or people that are against books? The former fits your description of religion. As far as the latter, well guess which groups are usually against books and knowledge?

for everyone the book club is very much a poor comparision

 

[norseamd]

I don't agree with that point because there is a definite, true, undeniable answer to the question whether or not god exists, he either does or he doesn't. In my opinion, using science and ignoring opinions will give you the correct answer. (But I'm indeed not absolutely certain, because there isn't yet enough evidence for god's non-existence, but it's very close.)

logic fail

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

I think god's existence can be proven, though, by god alone. However, I think circumstantial evidence (ie, seeing footprints on a deserted island) is evidence a being was there at some point, even if that exact being died a million years ago and evidence of its existence is no longer there.

That sort of how I treat evidence for God, FYI, though I know everyone won't agree with that.

For this to be true, God would have to be unable to do anything which cannot be explained in another fashion. That's incredibly limiting.

What an odd sentiment. I'm unsure as to why you'd still call him God under those circumstances, so limited is his power.

 

[norseamd]

There's no life after dead

care to explain how you know this

 

[witeken]

logic fail

What? Why?

care to explain how you know this

People, and all other animals for that matter, are made up by matter, working together to create a sustaining chemical reaction, but not forever. When it stops, the system ends, the information and everything else in the brain -- which really is you goes away, until all the atoms the made up you are gone and any direct evidence for your existence is gone, leaving the things you've done in the universe as a remainder.

We are all just slaves of natural selection, not god. There are no magic tricks like a soul.

 

[JEDIYoda]

care to explain how you know this

He probably knows this due to the fact that nobody ever came back to answer this question....not realizing that say there is a Heaven and a hell.....

Would you rather be in Heaven or come back to earth??
or if you are in hell -- there supposedly is no escape and eternal torment....go figure....


or the atheist answer is that Science cannot prove there is an afterlife thus there must be no afterlife..lolol
Or whatever happens after death is so much better than being on earth.....

 

[JEDIYoda]

There are no magic tricks like a soul.

okay them explain this --

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-lanza/do-we-have-a-soul-a-scien_b_850804.html

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2002/01/02/soul.aspx

http://merrieway.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/do-we-have-a-soul-a-scientific-answer/

UCLA did experiment*s years ago…and there were images measured around the moment of a person’s death. A circle of cloudy smoky energy left the body…was that the soul, the infinite matrix of energy? Science itself is not exacting..*.I personally will not wait for that answer. I feel a connection with departed souls, who I know or sense…the*re is a holographi*c imprint of the person’s essence. They remain imprinted in the hearts of those who love them and cherish their memory.
No one can prove one way or the other? Nevertheless, over 60 million people in the United States alone have experienced unexplainable phenomena around loss of a loved one. A voice, image, symbol, an eerie message of the departed. I have a spiritual connection with my beloved son, it is healing and gives purpose to live life to the fullest. On my life journey I have assisted other people to connect with their loved ones. Tears, joy, relief, healing, and a sense of completion are a few of the Blessings they feel. A gift of the proof of eternal soul. Blessings and Love, Merrie Lynn


Beyond what we can see,taste, smell or hear. Beyond our analytical mind, we can see, learn to feel what other’s do not sense. In this multidimensional state….we are set free of the boundaries and bondage of limited perceptions and perspective. We are set free, beyond the body and the mind…to dwell in the field of infinite intelligence. To dwell in the spirit, everlasting.

 

[jackstar7]

Holy shit.


Zing!

 

[witeken]

I will read your links another time, but for now, please answer me, how do you deal with this:

"Many physicists and consciousness researchers have argued that any action of a nonphysical mind on the brain would entail the violation of physical laws, such as the conservation of energy."

Wikipedia - Dualism

I can already say to you that I don't think those stories of people will convince me. People don't like death, so they're biased, they want there to be more. There was a great experiment about this, people suddenly become a theist when you tell them they're going to die:

TED - The 4 stories we tell ourselves about death

 

[norseamd]

What? Why?

there are only two answers therefore not knowing which of those two answers is true is saying there are more than two answers?

 

[norseamd]

People, and all other animals for that matter, are made up by matter, working together to create a sustaining chemical reaction, but not forever. When it stops, the system ends, the information and everything else in the brain -- which really is you goes away, until all the atoms the made up you are gone and any direct evidence for your existence is gone, leaving the things you've done in the universe as a remainder. We are all just slaves of natural selection, not god. There are no magic tricks like a soul.

do you know exactly how dark matter or dark energy affects life?

 

[norseamd]

dualism is shit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_religion

 

[witeken]

there are only two answers therefore not knowing which of those two answers is true is saying there are more than two answers?

No. He is an agnost because he thinks that "those zealots who claim to be absolutely certain that no god exists are just as irrational as those who are absolutley certain (like RR and JY) that a god exists."

I disagree. I don't think it is irrational to be gnost because the existence of god isn't an opinion, there's a definitive answer, so saying that you (really) don't know doesn't satisfy me, but it might for others.

 

[norseamd]

No. He is an agnost because he thinks that "those zealots who claim to be absolutely certain that no god exists are just as irrational as those who are absolutley certain (like RR and JY) that a god exists."

I disagree. I don't think it is irrational to be gnost because the existence of god isn't an opinion, there's a definitive answer, so saying that you (really) don't know doesn't satisfy me, but it might for others.

so then neither are irrational

 

[witeken]

do you know exactly how dark matter or dark energy affects life?

No, those are quite complex things and I'm not a scientist researching those things, like I also don't know (exactly) how the whole Higgs mechanism works, but I can tell some things about it.

But both dark matter and dark energy are real and impact the universe quite dramatically. Without it, life might not even be possible (e.g. we might get a closed universe and the universe would collapse into a big crunch instead of expending forever like it will).

But what is your point? What do you want to prove with that dark stuff about life/death.

 

[norseamd]

No, those are quite complex things and I'm not a scientist researching those things, like I also don't know (exactly) how the whole Higgs mechanism works, but I can tell some things about it.

But both dark matter and dark energy are real and impact the universe quite dramatically. Without it, life might not even be possible (e.g. we might get a closed universe and the universe would collapse into a big crunch instead of expending forever like it will).

But what is your point? What do you want to prove with that dark stuff about life/death.

what i am saying is that particles may exist which cause effects which many interpret as god or magic or esp

 

[PowerEngineer]

I think god's existence can be proven, though, by god alone. However, I think circumstantial evidence (ie, seeing footprints on a deserted island) is evidence a being was there at some point, even if that exact being died a million years ago and evidence of its existence is no longer there.

That sort of how I treat evidence for God, FYI, though I know everyone won't agree with that.

This takes me back to one of our earliest exchanges in which I allowed that if the stars in the sky were suddenly rearranged to spell out the opening verse of Genesis then I'd have to take that as strong evidence that the Christian god exists. I don't see any evidence that really points to a need for god to exist (as discussed in our Hawkins exchanges) and also nothing that would favor a Christian god over any other variety of god. I'm not going to believe in "big foot" either just because some people claim that they've seen his footprints.

But I really think that what you see as evidence of a Christian god is there for you because of the leap of faith you already made. It's just doesn't seem to be there for anyone who doesn't already believe.

 

[PingviN]

Holy shit.

No, I think that calls for a Holy [word that rhymes with] duck D:

No zings.

edit: wait, can I write that here?

edit2: fixed.

 

[sandorski]

much of atheism became a religion when they started preaching andthen they unified and consolidated their beliefs and then they started to rant against other philoshophies and religions even if they were not abrahamic

When the **** did this happen?

 

[norseamd]

When the **** did this happen?

my fault

i was going to use the word codified

i think the right word is platforming their beliefs

 

[sandorski]

my fault

i was going to use the word codified

i think the right word is platforming their beliefs

...when did that happen?

 

[JEDIYoda]

...when did that happen?

I love it when people refuse to open their eyes...