Does it bother you in the U.K. that the queen is on coins?

[Toshunya86]

The problem of atheism is that , amongst other things , it puts science and progress above anything else and considers religion as machinations/ narratives .

Atheism is similar to a religion since it needs to spread to the entire humanity to stop being contested.  This is the biggest paradox. 

Now I can understand that many people are atheists , what I do not understand is their constant hate of religion , as if they were superior to "The stupid people who believes in stories of Jesus" or "The stupid muslims" .

There is a sense of arrogance in most high-profile atheists - deeply linked to the self-hatred and inflated ego - which tells a lot about today's society.

[Sparrow]

Wow, this thread has veered wildly off-topic hasn’t it?

[silenceissilver]

10 hours ago, Notafront4adragon said:

I don't think atheism is a comfortable choice at all. Quiet the opposite, religion settles the mind, and gives you an easy answer. Do this and be ok. Atheism asks deeper questions.

I think atheism is materialistic and arrogant. Firstly, it assumes, what cannot be explained by science, at least principally, can not be. Science cannot explain why there is something in the first place. Religion can't explain it to the limited human mind either, in a way that we understand it like we understand why a car drives. But it teaches us to be humble and to accept there are things beyond us - these "things" actually have a name - God.

Atheism assumes we must scientifically understand something or it cannot exist. Ultimately, that means assuming the role of God. And if a human assumes the role of God, that's satanism. For you atheists, there is another word for it: Megalomania

 

Interestingly, Newton had a strong faith, he knew science has limitations.

[silenceissilver]

21 minutes ago, KDave said:

I understand it well enough, study the 20th century to understand Atheism. 

Yes exactly - do what thou wilt. Satanism/Atheism. 

That's yet another topic but I think Karl Marx actually meant Satanism, when he wrote atheism. He had to use a term that wouldn't put off people too much, though.

[Martlet]

8 minutes ago, Toshunya86 said:

The problem of atheism is that , amongst other things , it puts science and progress above anything else and considers religion as machinations/ narratives .

As do religions!  Very few take their religious text to be literal, accepting they are allegory and metaphoric. So why take them so damn seriously?  Then argue among yourself over whose interpretation is right, usually ignoring centuries of language mis-translations, cultural changes.  And refuting other faiths that are saying more or less the same things.  

[Martlet]

12 minutes ago, silenceissilver said:

Atheism assumes we must scientifically understand something or it cannot exist. Ultimately, that means assuming the role of God. And if a human assumes the role of God, that's satanism. For you atheists, there is another word for it: Megalomania

There is no assumption, just rejection of the existence of God. This is the realm of theology, philosophy.  Science is another realm of knowledge and enquiry.  Your line of thought is something you are imposing on the non-believer.

[KDave]

Atheism is a religion. People believe Atheism. The blind faithful followers that call everyone who don't not believe a heretic (stupid/ignorant/religious).

---

Added 0 minutes later...

16 minutes ago, Sparrow said:

Wow, this thread has veered wildly off-topic hasn’t it?

Welcome to the silver forum brother. 

[Toshunya86]

45 minutes ago, Martlet said:

As do religions!  Very few take their religious text to be literal, accepting they are allegory and metaphoric. So why take them so damn seriously?  Then argue among yourself over whose interpretation is right, usually ignoring centuries of language mis-translations, cultural changes.  And refuting other faiths that are saying more or less the same things.  

When you try to kill the distance between men and god - you are actually killing the distance between humans.

There is an equal distance between men and the higher powers ( god or not) - and a society or a social construct trying to kill this distance will need to create a new narrative. 

This narrative (God does not exist , God is a fallacy , religions are deceiving people etc etc ) , should it be right or not - it s not the question - will be spread into the entire population by force and nothing good will come out of it. 

Check the Cristeros revolution in Mexico , check the civil war in Spain , check the French Revolution , with thousands of priests slaughtered and churches burnt . ( I will not mention the reform because i will get kicked out of the forum:) ) 

Atheism brings the same amount of terror / hatred / division than religions because in essence it is a religion , with the only difference that it does not put the same distance between men and god than Christianism do - hence allowing the powers of money to take over.

That's why atheism is promoted both by radical socialism/communism and free-market globalist capitalism. It "cleans the ground" from any sort of spiritual resistance and from the possibility of god-fearing leaders putting an end to the absolute circus the world is right now in terms of predatory elites vs starving population

 

 

[Toshunya86]

10 minutes ago, Martlet said:

As do religions!  Very few take their religious text to be literal, accepting they are allegory and metaphoric. So why take them so damn seriously?  Then argue among yourself over whose interpretation is right, usually ignoring centuries of language mis-translations, cultural changes.  And refuting other faiths that are saying more or less the same things.  

Because the very nature of a religion is to be proselyte (I hope that s the right word). Elites can also manipulate and take advantage of the religious fact to cause wars because of money. It is not without risk. But the spreading of real catholicism has a positive effect on the common good  , which is ultimately something we should strive to achieve. 

[Sparrow]

9 minutes ago, KDave said:

Atheism is a religion. People believe Atheism. The blind faithful followers that call everyone who don't not believe a heretic (stupid/ignorant/religious).

Fundamentally incorrect.  Atheism is a religion in the same way that “off” is a TV channel. 

Faith is a requirement of religion.  One cannot have “faith” that supernatural beings don’t exist, you just need to look out of the window and see with your own eyes that magic is a fairytale by virtue of the absence of unicorns. 

There have been thousands of deities worshipped throughout human history, and not a single one do we have a shred of definitive proof for.  But sure, it’s atheism that has the “blind faithful followers”.

[Martlet]

11 minutes ago, KDave said:

Atheism is a religion. People believe Atheism. The blind faithful followers that call everyone who don't not believe a heretic (stupid/ignorant/religious).

I'd love to hear what Atheists believe.  I'm not sure whats wrong being labelled "religious", though i will happily call out people who believe in stupid or ignorant ideas, religious or otherwise.  Generally speaking, so do most religious communities, rolling their eyes at crack pot literal readings that serve no benefit and detract from the core faith.  

[KDave]

4 minutes ago, Martlet said:

There is no assumption, just rejection of the existence of God. This is the realm of theology, philosophy.  Science is another realm of knowledge and enquiry.  Your line of thought is something you are imposing on the non-believer.

The only tenant of Atheism is to reject God? That is Satanism. 

Perhaps we need to agree what God is. If you think its a being that watches everything, I reject this idea too. I see God as a vehicle to explain nature, but I don't think there are many who think this.

Too many Atheists reject not just God but the bible, the church and priesthood, the institutions linked to God (monarchy), everything surrounding it. I see Atheists replace God with science, believing in theories such as the big bang that are ultimately no different from Genesis.

"The universe started as nothing and then there was a big bang."

"In the beginning, there was nothing. Then God said, let there be light, and there was light."

Please explain the difference between those two theories.

[silenceissilver]

16 minutes ago, Martlet said:

There is no assumption, just rejection of the existence of God. This is the realm of theology, philosophy.  Science is another realm of knowledge and enquiry.  Your line of thought is something you are imposing on the non-believer.

Let me reword it, I didn't express it well. Atheism means humans taking on the role of God.

Why? Because we are limted. Rejecting that there is something beyond us means - nothing is beyond us. If nothing is beyond us, we can at least principally explain why there is something and not nothing. If we can explain that, we are principally able to create it - it meaning existance. We would be our own creators and thus assume the role of God. 

As a matter of fact, there are  transhumanists (or Satanists as I would call them) - Ray Kurzweil for example, who think we will create artifical intelligence that will make humans obsolete and this AI will eventually connect the whole universe with an advanced form of WiFi and the universe will then be a living being. There are variations of these believes, e.g. future humans creating the universe in our past. The common denominator is human activity eventually leading to the creation of the universe.

[silenceissilver]

20 minutes ago, Sparrow said:

Fundamentally incorrect.  Atheism is a religion in the same way that “off” is a TV channel.

That's not correct, you mix up agnosticism with atheism. Atheism is a belief (that there would be no God), Agnosticism assumes no position, it basically it means "I don't know" (if there is a God or not).

[KDave]

1 minute ago, Martlet said:

I'd love to what Atheist believes.  I'm not sure whats wrong being labelled "religious", though i will happily call out people who believe in stupid or ignorant ideas, religious or otherwise.  Generally speaking, so do most religious communities, rolling their eyes at crack pot literal readings that serve no benefit and detract from the core faith.  

I point out the foolishness of holding a position of faith against another position of faith. The only difference is one has thousands of years of knowledge, tenants and tried and tested ways of living and the other has 'do what thou wilt'. 

I do agree to read the words literally is not going to lead to much understanding. 

[silenceissilver]

17 minutes ago, Toshunya86 said:

7 minutes ago, KDave said:

I see Atheists replace God with science, believing in theories such as the big bang that are ultimately no different from Genesis.

"The universe started as nothing and then there was a big bang."

"In the beginning, there was nothing. Then God said, let there be light, and there was light."

Please explain the difference between those two theories.

There is an equal distance between men and the higher powers ( god or not) - and a society or a social construct trying to kill this distance will need to create a new narrative. 

This narrative (God does not exist , God is a fallacy , religions are deceiving people etc etc ) , should it be right or not - it s not the question - will be spread into the entire population by force and nothing good will come out of it.

As a matter of fact Christian structures, superficially, but stripped off it's metaphysical core, have survied in the form of the political, quasi religious ideologies that we saw ever since the French Revolution. Be it Liberalism, Socialism, National Scoialism, Feminism, Mulitculturalism or Globlaism - all of them share superficial structures they took from Christianity but of course all are materialistic. This will not make much sense to most now, thus I will actually make a new thread about this, but not today.

[KDave]

14 minutes ago, Sparrow said:

Fundamentally incorrect.  Atheism is a religion in the same way that “off” is a TV channel. 

Faith is a requirement of religion.  One cannot have “faith” that supernatural beings don’t exist, you just need to look out of the window and see with your own eyes that magic is a fairytale by virtue of the absence of unicorns. 

There have been thousands of deities worshipped throughout human history, and not a single one do we have a shred of definitive proof for.  But sure, it’s atheism that has the “blind faithful followers”.

'We don't know' is the most used answer in science. Not a single shred of proof for many theories.  

Religion can be summarised as 'we observe nature and expect from experience that certain behaviour has these outcomes', then told in stories in a way that even an illiterate peasant might understand, for the most part. 

[Martlet]

2 minutes ago, KDave said:

The only tenant of Atheism is to reject God? That is Satanism. 

Only under some theological teaching.  That's on you, atheists wouldn't believe in satan (it infers God and belief in the Abrahamic faiths). 

2 minutes ago, KDave said:

Perhaps we need to agree what God is. If you think its a being that watches everything, I reject this idea too. I see God as a vehicle to explain nature, but I don't think there are many who think this.

This would be Deism, belief in a supreme being., but without much time for the institutions and authority of churches.  

2 minutes ago, KDave said:

"The universe started as nothing and then there was a big bang."

"In the beginning, there was nothing. Then God said, let there be light, and there was light."

Please explain the difference between those two theories.

There's no difference, they are both unknowable events, essentially time and universe starts then. What ever was before is irrelevant imo.

[Notafront4adragon]

16 minutes ago, silenceissilver said:

I think atheism is materialistic and arrogant. Firstly, it assumes, what cannot be explained by science, at least principally, can not be. Science cannot explain why there is something in the first place. Religion can't explain it to the limited human mind either, in a way that we understand it like we understand why a car drives. But it teaches us to be humble and to accept there are things beyond us - these "things" actually have a name - God.

Atheism assumes we must scientifically understand something or it cannot exist. Ultimately, that means assuming the role of God. And if a human assumes the role of God, that's satanism. For you atheists, there is another word for it: Megalomania

 

Interestingly, Newton had a strong faith, he knew science has limitations.

I am not an atheist, as I see it you can't prove it one way or the other. I am confident in saying however that atheism doesn't assume science has the answer nor does it demand that something must be explained to exist. You're conflating science with philosophy when in truth they can exist side by side. 

Yes Newton was very religious as were/are lots of scientists. Much of our understanding of genetics stems from the work done by a monk Gregor Mendel. Science and religion are separate, one doesn't preclude the other.

Plenty of atheists come across as as particularly arrogant (Dawkins in particular) and ironically can be as zealous as religious extremists. They are wrong to state religion doesn't help or advance humanity.

I don't discount all religious teachings, indeed Christianity in my opinion, has some very sensible moral teachings regarding tolerance, forgiveness and humility as well as unconditional love, but so does Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism etc.

What's striking about those that identify as religious are mostly intolerant of any idea that challenges their view point, and throughout history have acted with extreme violence towards other view points. 

[Martlet]

6 minutes ago, silenceissilver said:

As a matter of fact Christian structures, superficially, but stripped off it's metaphysical core, have survied in the form of the political, quasi religious ideologies that we saw ever since the French Revolution. Be it Liberalism, Socialism, National Scoialism, Feminism, Mulitculturalism or Globlaism - all of them share superficial structures they took from Christianity but of course all are materialistic. This will not make much sense to most now, thus I will actually make a new thread about this, but not today.

Overlooking a little tradition of the Greeks, where much western philosophy stems from .  Its no coincidence that the Bible comes to us through Greek, with plenty of opportunity to cross pollinate ideas.  The Greeks were arguing over gods or refuting them, hundreds of years before a guy in Judea got nailed up for saying we should all just get along. 

[KDave]

4 minutes ago, Martlet said:

There's no difference, they are both unknowable events, essentially time and universe starts then. What ever was before is irrelevant imo.

Exactly, no difference, they are both positions of faith. 

5 minutes ago, Martlet said:

This would be Deism, belief in a supreme being., but without much time for the institutions and authority of churches.  

Perhaps then I will just say I think 'God' is natural law that has yet to be defined by science. Behave a certain way, expect a certain outcome, reasoning being because that is the nature of the reality in which we exist. Thinking it through logically, if I trust what the bible says, I might conclude that to behave as a christian should have a good chance of leading to a good state of being, and to do what thou wilt will lead to rock bottom (hell). 

6 minutes ago, Martlet said:

Only under some theological teaching.  That's on you, atheists wouldn't believe in satan (it infers God and belief in the Abrahamic faiths). 

Surely its on Atheism to explain why its the same as Satanism. 

[Notafront4adragon]

What happened to all the miracles God was so fond of? It would really help clear up all this mess if he/it/whatever could just use another burning bush to tell us who is right.  

[silenceissilver]

11 minutes ago, Notafront4adragon said:

I am not an atheist, as I see it you can't prove it one way or the other. I am confident in saying however that atheism doesn't assume science has the answer nor does it demand that something must be explained to exist. You're conflating science with philosophy when in truth they can exist side by side.

It does assume nothing is beyond us (no God) thus principally everything is explainable. That doesn't imply that science actually ever will but that it principally could.

 

7 minutes ago, Martlet said:

Overlooking a little tradition of the Greeks, where much western philosophy stems from .  Its no coincidence that the Bible comes to us through Greek, with plenty of opportunity to cross pollinate ideas.  The Greeks were arguing over gods or refuting them, hundreds of years before a guy in Judea got nailed up for saying we should all just get along. 

No, not at all, I thought it probably wouldn't make much sense without further explaination. I still thought it fit in here but it's actually a new subject - as said I will elaborate on what I meant in a new thread but not today.

[Martlet]

3 minutes ago, KDave said:

Surely its on Atheism to explain why its the same as Satanism. 

Illogical argument, you have made the assertion, you expand on or defend it.  Asking someone who doesnt believe something to explain that thing is just a straw man. 

3 minutes ago, KDave said:

Perhaps then I will just say I think 'God' is natural law that has yet to be defined by science. Behave a certain way, expect a certain outcome, reasoning being because that is the nature of the reality in which we exist. Thinking it through logically, if I trust what the bible says, I might conclude that to behave as a christian should have a good chance of leading to a good state of being, and to do what thou wilt will lead to rock bottom (hell). 

Have you considered Buddism?

[KDave]

1 minute ago, Notafront4adragon said:

What happened to all the miracles God was so fond of? It would really help clear up all this mess if he/it/whatever could just use another burning bush to tell us who is right.  

An unexplained event that should be impossible. That happens all the time in Quantum mechanics. Miracles all day every day. 

Burning bush - stop reading the text literally and it makes more sense