Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Most Europeans are atheists. It is a by product of socialism... Schism.

G

No, most europeans are non practicing christians. That's not the same thing. Atheism is the stern belief that no god whatsoever exists, if you had to put european majority into a category they would be Agnositc.

what exactly is a non practici g Christian?

G

whatwhat wrote:
No, most europeans are non practicing christians. That's not the same thing. Atheism is the stern belief that no god whatsoever exists, if you had to put european majority into a category they would be Agnositc.

No, Atheism is the lack of belief in God. You are an Atheist if you do not believe in something called a God. It doesn't mean that you believe God does not exist, only that you do not know of such a thing.

@ Green blow Fly...They are the people who think Moses put 2 of each animal on the ark


I look at it like this. In the beginning dirt created itself from nothing

dogma wrote:

whatwhat wrote:
No, most europeans are non practicing christians. That's not the same thing. Atheism is the stern belief that no god whatsoever exists, if you had to put european majority into a category they would be Agnositc.

No, Atheism is the lack of belief in God. You are an Atheist if you do not believe in something called a God. It doesn't mean that you believe God does not exist, only that you do not know of such a thing.

Oh well I'm imensely sorry for that mr perfect.

My point still stands.

Green Blow Fly wrote:what exactly is a non practici g Christian?

G

Someone who is declared christian by their census but isn't an orthodox member or doesn't necessarily believe in all/any elements of Christianity.

That was Noah and he was a son of Satan.
G

whatwhat wrote:
Oh well I'm imensely sorry for that mr perfect.

My point still stands.

There is big difference between saying "I do not believe in God", and "I believe there is no God."

Your point doesn't stand, because a non-practicing Christian could be an atheist Christian. Someone who does not believe in God, but does believe in Christianity.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Most Europeans are atheists. It is a by product of socialism... Schism.

G

According to the EEC's own figures, it is 18%.

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_225_report_en.pdf

However that's not directly relevant to the topic of belief in evolution, which wasn't covered in the survey.

dogma wrote:

whatwhat wrote:
Oh well I'm imensely sorry for that mr perfect.

My point still stands.

There is big difference between saying "I do not believe in God", and "I believe there is no God."

Your point doesn't stand, because a non-practicing Christian could be an atheist Christian. Someone who does not believe in God, but does believe in Christianity.

ffs whatever grudge you seem to bear with me just drop it, it doesn't go unoticed you nitpicking at a lot of the things I have posted since you disagreed with me over the Israel issue. "Someone who does not believe in God, but does believe in Christianity" your claiming someone can believe in christianity, a monotheistic religion, and not believe in god/believe there is no god? Are you that stupid? (thats a rhetorical question btw, you have no obligation in answering)

whatwhat wrote:
ffs whatever grudge you seem to bear with me just drop it, it doesn't go unoticed you nitpicking at a lot of the things I have posted since you disagreed with me over the Israel issue. "Someone who does not believe in God, but does believe in Christianity" your claiming someone can believe in christianity, a monotheistic religion, and not believe in god? Are you that stupid.

I don't have any grudge against you at all. You just say a lot of ridiculous things in an unnecessarily confrontational way. If you're going to be assertive take the time to be correct.

And yes, you can believe in a monotheistic religion without believing in God. You can say "I believe that God exists, but I do not believe in him." You can also make the statement "I do not believe in God, but I believe in Christian teachings." The literal definition of the word God is 'supreme being'. To be considered a Christian all you have to do is accept the premise that Jesus Christ was the son of God. This means you must accept that Jesus Christ was a close relation of a supreme being. That does not require that the supreme being actually exist, only that Jesus serve as a theoretical reflection of it.

dogma wrote:I don't have any grudge against you at all. You just say a lot of ridiculous things in an unnecessarily confrontational way. If you're going to be assertive take the time to be correct.

And you don't?

as for the second half of your post: Atheism=the rejection of theism...i.e. panthesim, polytheism, monothesim (chrisitanity). Now how can you be an athesit and also be a Christian, if the definiton of the word Atheist is to reject what christianity is. Take a step back and apreciate how ignorant you are comming across right now. making up crap to back up your point (a point made purely to get at me as some personal vendetta) when you have no idea what your talking about.

To be a Christian is very specific. Their God said the world was created in seven days. I have no problem with that. To me a stance as one who does not believe In a greater being is a cop out. Who is to say that there is not something greater than you or I. It all comes down to faith. I don't need a heaven to make me feel more secure. I can handle a concept that there are things that exist that are beyond my realm of understanding. We all know fear. I am okay with that.

G

whatwhat wrote:
as for the second half of your post: Atheism=the rejection of theism...i.e. panthesim, polytheism, monothesim (chrisitanity).

Atheism is the negation of Theism, not necessarily the rejection of it. It breaks down like this:

Do you believe in God?

Yes = Theist
Not yes = Atheist

whatwhat wrote:
Now how can you be an athesit and also be a Christian, if the definiton of the word Atheist is to reject what christianity is.

Because you can answer 'I don't know' to the question of 'Do you believe in God', and still be considered an Atheist. I can be a Christian who is not certain of my belief in God, but still certain that Christianity is a valuable thing. Being an Atheist is not the same thing as being a Secularist.

whatwhat wrote:
Take a step back and apreciate how ignorant you are comming across right now. making up crap to back up your point (a point made purely to get at me as some personal vendetta) when you have no idea what your talking about.

What am I making up? I'm literally taking definitions out of the dictionary, and explaining to you what they mean.

Also, I have no idea why you feel this is a personal vendetta. You made a comment based on an incorrect understanding of a term. I corrected you. There is nothing personal in this.

whatwhat wrote:If the first part of that paragraph was written "I've always been happy to tell people when I think they're wrong. " I might have believed the second part.

If it's my opinion, I'll say I think they're wrong. If someone has said something that is completely factually wrong, I'll say that. Funnily enough there are facts in the world, and people get them wrong all the time. But all that has nothing to do with anything, and I'm left wondering why you've left the rest of the discussion alone...

Polonius wrote:I guess I just don't see the problem with clinging to some sort of creationism. I think it's incorrect, but I fail to see how believing in a young earth hurts oneself or others or society as a whole. What parts of daily life are affected by an understanding of geology, paleontology, or cosmology?

It means you have a culture of people rejecting established science and scientific authorities. I think it leads to things like the MMR debacle.

It's also hard to say that you support faith but then point out parts of a persons faith and say "that's wrong and you're wrong to believe that." It's a complete misunderstanding of the way faith works to even attempt that.

Except faith isn't about rejecting what is known, or at least shouldn't have to be. It is about building a sophisticated world view that has a place for what we know about the world in terms of science, religion and philosophy. Simply declaring one book to be absolutely literally true regardless of everything else shortchanges science and religion.

Mango wrote:Using your very own argument. Have any events described in the Bible actually occurred that has historical records backing them up? When corroborating evidence is found in Egyptian writings and Hittite writings and Babylonian writings to say that certain events occurred, and later archeological evidence surfaces again corroborating the bible, enough in the bible is true, then extrapolating from what they believe from what they know without personally experiencing it. Or put it another way. People see trees. People see plants. People see people. They believe they exist because they have seen proof. The Bible say god created all of them. They extrapolate and believe everything in the bible. I reiterate. For most people, Science is a FAITH.

The bible was written in the context of the world events of the time. Nothing in there shows knowledge beyond what was known to the authors of the book. Which isn't exactly shocking.

I have no idea what people seeing trees has to do with science as faith, I really don't.

With that being said. I am an agnostic as well as a scientist. Why, because you cannot prove that God does not exist anymore than you can prove that a God does exist. THAT is based on the scientific method.

Absolutely, science says nothing about the existance of God. God is by his nature beyond the natural, and therefore beyond science. I don't think anyone has claimed otherwise. People are talking about religious beliefs that deny the scientific record, which is a very different thing.

Envy89 wrote:


I look at it like this. In the beginning dirt created itself from nothing

And I look at it like this: in the beginning God had already been there forever

Green Blow Fly wrote: To me a stance as one who does not believe In a greater being is a cop out.

What ?

Greebynog wrote:And I look at it like this: in the beginning God had already been there forever

Not quite... it is more along the lines of "in the beginning, there was a non physical entity that was / is not bound by the laws of time."

Not trying to get into an argument over which religion is correct hear. I just think that for someone to not believe in any religion is silly. All things physical are bound by the laws of time. All things physical have some point at which they were created.... and we all know that matter cannot create itself....

Typeline wrote:Sometimes tolerance is not the answer.

I am so gonna quote that out of context on every occasion. Oh, and sig it.

sebster wrote:

Polonius wrote:I guess I just don't see the problem with clinging to some sort of creationism. I think it's incorrect, but I fail to see how believing in a young earth hurts oneself or others or society as a whole. What parts of daily life are affected by an understanding of geology, paleontology, or cosmology?

It means you have a culture of people rejecting established science and scientific authorities. I think it leads to things like the MMR debacle.

That's a bit of slippery slope argument. The MMR debacle was a legal strategy (that failed) that had nothing to do with faith or religion. Again, and I hate to keep repeating myself, I fully oppose people using their faith to set public policy. All I'm saying is that I stand for a persons right to have whatever beliefs they want to in their own mind. I don't want it taught in schools, I don't want it used as evidence in the courtroom, and I dont' want it used to elect people. But if it makes a person feel better to think that god created his ancestors 6000 years ago and simply made everything look older to test his faith, well, I say let him. He's not going to be a visiting lecturer at the Geology Society. Yes, in a scientific forum, you can tell him that he's wrong. If he brings his faith based ideas into a factual arena, he deserves what he gets.

Freedom of though, or freedom of Conscious (the underlying right behind the rights of Speech, worship, etc.) is like any other right: there are going to be some abuses, and some crappy results. But I defend billy bob's right to think that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs just as I defend the right of scientists to explore unfettered of religious constraints. Hell, I tend to be more vociferous in my defense of science, because I like science and my faith has no problem with it, but I still don't approve of any attempt to castigate people for their beliefs.

It's also hard to say that you support faith but then point out parts of a persons faith and say "that's wrong and you're wrong to believe that." It's a complete misunderstanding of the way faith works to even attempt that.

Except faith isn't about rejecting what is known, or at least shouldn't have to be. It is about building a sophisticated world view that has a place for what we know about the world in terms of science, religion and philosophy. Simply declaring one book to be absolutely literally true regardless of everything else shortchanges science and religion.

Not everybody is sophisticated. We're intelligent people, educated and trained in matters of theology, philosophy, logic and science. I'd argue that saying it's impossible that the Bible is literally true shows that you don't have a truly open mind towards faith. It's almost certainly not, I'd agree, but I don't know that. It could be true. God could have laid down dinosaur bones to test our faith, and every word could be the literal truth.

Most people reject the idea that the bible is literally true because it conflicts with what we know about the world and how it works. Trusting our senses and reason, we decide that it is more allegorical, that translation, age, and the simplicity of it's authors give us wiggle room in which to extract the core truths while still being men of reason. We know that if god created us in his image, part of that was the abilty to think, create, and judge; and that rejection of literalism is part of our growth as spiritual beings. I'm totally on board with this thought.

That said, there are a lot of people that, for lack of a better word, are simply better at self delusion. They can reject the evidence we see, they can ignore the rational processes we use, and the can gloss over the inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the text itself. It's a very human thing, delusion. You see it in every person who stays with an abusive spouse, or believes that their friend is quitting drugs "for real this time," or the guy who submits his fifth novel after four were rejected. I use my self delusion on other things, but a lot use it on their faith and their religion. Yes, through extensive therapy, medication, and treatment you could probably break these people down, but to what end? I still say it's easier to just work around them, and kinder as well.

Frazzled wrote:Wow, I'm so pleased I just payed to be a DCM so you people could attack religion.

In the immortal words of Ron White. "Well feth you."

I'm going to go away for awhile.

Sorry Frazzled but I am really going to have to take issue with on this one.

Firstly being a paid up member doesn't not mean that all opinions must agree with yours.

Secondly this is not a religion bashing, merely an invitation to debate. There was nothing in the initial post which stated the opinion that the creationist stance was necessarily inferior. Just different.

Finally all opinions and stances 'must' be free to be challenged and scrutinsed. I appreciate how important to many people their faith is but this does not make it immune to criticism. This does not however mean you are being persecuted, I've noticed a very worrying trend amongst many religious groups (this is by no means limited to Christianity) to claim persecution whener challenges to their views and opinions are made. This is not only inaccurate but counter productive as its going to make those with opposing viewpoints far less willing to debate with you.

Lets get back to the topic at hand.

With regards to creationism I personally have no time for it. Simply because it defies any logic. Generally I'm a big beiver in the principle of Occums Razor and a religious answer to a question (any question) to me just is neither simple not logical. Indeed giving 'God' as a solution to any question simply raises far more subsequent questions that it answers. Its what Dawkins calls a Skyhook.

To be perfectly honest I've done very little reading on evolution since A-Level biology. But I do recall seeing plenty of evidence for it which I have no intention of going into now. Incidentally I notice many are confusing Evolution and Abiogenisis. Evolution never has nor ever intended to offer a solution to the origin of life on earth. That’s a matter for another day.

i dont know. i asked questions in my sciance class.... questions that got me kicked out of the class countless times (ok... im sure there is a record of it at the school if they keep them that long).

it was allways stuff like

Q : "well, 2 chapters ago we learned that everything has a point at which it begun. and in the last chapter we learned that matter cannot creat itself..... so what created the universe again???"

A : "The big Bang, you know, when all the matter in the universe was pulled into one tiny point no bigger then the tip of your pen then exploded"

Q : "and where did that matter come from?"

A : "GET OUT OF MY CLASS!"

So you were a troll that added nothing to conversations even in school? I guess that makes sense.

It's a bit unfair to accuse Envy89 of being a troll, he has a reasonable point.

Science has still not solved the question of how the universe was created. That doesn't mean it can't.

Possibly the concept of finite universes is beyond human understanding.

Sadly it now seems that the Large Hadron Collider is out of action for six months.

Time for a joke.

A surgeon, an engineer and an economist are sitting in a bar arguing about the nature of God.

The surgeon says that God create Eve from an rib he took out of Adam. This was a surgical procedure, so obviously God is a surgeon.

The engineer argues that before God created Eve or Adam, he first had to create the universe, which he did by building it up from primordial chaos. This was a huge engineering project, so obviously God is an engineer.

The economist clears his throat and says, "Where do you think the chaos came from?"

Kilkrazy wrote:It's a bit unfair to accuse Envy89 of being a troll, he has a reasonable point.

Science has still not solved the question of how the universe was created. That doesn't mean it can't.

Possibly the concept of finite universes is beyond human understanding.

Sadly it now seems that the Large Hadron Collider is out of action for six months.

It does have some interesting theories though. Of course, at some point mathematical modeling becomes roughly analogous to writing a logical proof of God's existence.

Kilkrazy wrote:It's a bit unfair to accuse Envy89 of being a troll, he has a reasonable point.

Science has still not solved the question of how the universe was created. That doesn't mean it can't.

Possibly the concept of finite universes is beyond human understanding.

Sadly it now seems that the Large Hadron Collider is out of action for six months.

It's a valid question, no doubt about that, but it wasn't presented as a valid question or point. It was presented as a smarmy little straw man that had very little to do with the actual topic, and was more concerned with making a position look bad than in advancing any recognizable point or assertion. For those keeping track at home, it involved the following little internet debating gambits: moving the goalposts, presenting anecdotal and unprovable evidence, a straw man argument, and posting in an ambiguous and indeed nearly unreadable format so that he can always claim it was "a joke." I'm sorry if it's unfair, but the Poster has made a habit of making similarly structured posts in various debates. I think my record is pretty clear that I'm fair minded and able to both defend my position well and willing to concede points when I cannot. I know a troll when I see one.

The tragedy inherent in this is that I actually agree with him on this point. I think that the universe was created by God. I just would advance the argument a little more diplomatically.

People often say that religion makes it's followers feel good because if they follow it's tenets then they get to go to heaven or something along those lines. I think that aethism is the same and even moreso... there is no accountibility to a higher power so you are free to do whatever you like as long as you can keep other people happy.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:People often say that religion makes it's followers feel good because if they follow it's tenets then they get to go to heaven or something along those lines. I think that aethism is the same and even moreso... there is no accountibility to a higher power so you are free to do whatever you like as long as you can keep other people happy.

G

I think that everybody reacts to their own existential angst in different ways. Some find atheism comforting, as it allows a person to live for themselves and other people, and not feel that their life is simply a means to an end. Others find it comforting to know that there is a higher power that loves us and wants to be with us.

I think it's a bit like any other lifestyle choice. Every person has the obligation to themselves to make their own peace with the universe.

Green Blow Fly wrote:People often say that religion makes it's followers feel good because if they follow it's tenets then they get to go to heaven or something along those lines. I think that aethism is the same and even moreso... there is no accountibility to a higher power so you are free to do whatever you like as long as you can keep other people happy.

G

Its important to understand that Atheism isn't a religion. Neither is Theism. They are just terms related to the belief in God, or gods. A Theist can be secular, and and Atheist can be religious. There is a lot of crossover. For example, its hard to classify a secular humanist. Clearly, as secularists, they do not follow any religion. However, as humanists, they believe in a supreme being, or ultimate reality (humanity) and so could be said to believe in God. At some point it all just comes down a semantic choice as the terms being utilized are so incredibly inclusive that they barely have meaning at all.

Envy89 wrote:i dont know. i asked questions in my sciance class.... questions that got me kicked out of the class countless times (ok... im sure there is a record of it at the school if they keep them that long).

it was allways stuff like

Q : "well, 2 chapters ago we learned that everything has a point at which it begun. and in the last chapter we learned that matter cannot creat itself..... so what created the universe again???"

A : "The big Bang, you know, when all the matter in the universe was pulled into one tiny point no bigger then the tip of your pen then exploded"

Q : "and where did that matter come from?"

A : "GET OUT OF MY CLASS!"

Indeed there is nothing wrong with those questions and I'm the first to admit there are many things that currently we cannot answer. I'm just not convinced that its appropriate to look at something we currently can't explain and therefore assume the only alternative is that a supnatural being was involved. I prefer to admit that we simply do know whilst remaining confident that answers (and more than likely more questions!) will emerge with time and study.

Indeed going back to my earlier point whilst god 'answers' one short term question it subsequently creates thousands more. If the universe was made by a complex creator then by this logic that must also have been created by something even more complicated and so on and so on. To me creationism is nothing more than a vicious circle.

Polonius wrote:

I think that everybody reacts to their own existential angst in different ways. Some find atheism comforting, as it allows a person to live for themselves and other people, and not feel that their life is simply a means to an end. Others find it comforting to know that there is a higher power that loves us and wants to be with us.

I think it's a bit like any other lifestyle choice. Every person has the obligation to themselves to make their own peace with the universe.

I agree with this. I admit I do find atheism comforting because, as far as im concerned, the alternative is an horrific nightmare.

Let me elaborate, according to the teaching of Christianity, God:

1) Is constantly observing us all, even behind closed doors in the privacy of our own homes.
2) Is reading our thoughts, the ultimate though police!
3) Will subsequently judge and punish us accordingly, based on his own rules that we (humanity) have had no say whatsover in. Without hope of due process or appeal, effectively making him a self appointed Judge, Jury and Executioner.
4) Is totally self appointed and does not have to answer to anyone. Giving him carte balance to act as he sees fit without fear of our aproval.

To me this is the ultimate Orwellian nightmare and it honestly puzzles me that people take comfort in what is essentially a supernatural dictatorship. If the state where to act this it would lead to rioting and revolution and rightly so (mind you I live in Britain so a strongly worded letter to the Times would be the most I could expect!). If I live in dictatorship I always have the option of taking to the streets and starting an uprising but with God I have no such option.

So yes my Atheism is comforting because if I am wrong then, as far as im concerned, we are all slaves.