How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-11-2014, 01:59 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
Shit tier trolling.

Needs improvement.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
25-11-2014, 02:00 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 01:44 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(25-11-2014 01:30 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  Further, the Bible explicitly says that the motive for people not wanting the Creator to exist is based on the motive of personal willful rebellion, pride, and arrogance as found in Romans 1:18-24 therefore it is an objective source of information that I appealed to and not my subjective opinion -- therefore, that exonerates me of any alleged 'self righteousness and superiority' which you accused me of .

The bible is an objective source of information? Laughat

Quote:...since you as a professed Atheist doesn't desire a Creator to exist.

I've known at least a few atheists that say that they genuinely wish that there was a creator but that the lack of evidence forces them to admit that it isn't rational to believe that. Most atheists I know, including me, don't actually consider the question of whether they'd like there to be a god or not, they just follow the evidence. If it turned out that there was evidence to support the conclusion they would accept it.

You really have no clue what atheism entails. It's sad because you seem like you are probably pretty intelligent and if you could bring yourself to look at the "evidence" without the prior assumption that god exists and the bible is accurate you would see what a house of cards it all is.

Absolutely, the Bible is an objective Source of Information on how to live. The very Founders of our Nation thought so...even Jefferson who was a Deist for the most part. The Founders written correspondence regarding biblical principles and ideology amounts to 30% of ALL their communication. Further, The Bible records specific scientific processes and facts written down 3-4,000 years ago which modern science finally got around to confirming as absolute truth. Lastly, The Bible has changed countless lives for the better because its authority is far higher than Mans self centered Humanist ideologies which leads to destruction. Its a shame you have such hatred and hostility toward it and the Creator who inspired it .

As an evidential Christian Apologist, I make my case for a personal Creator from the established scientific evidence and not from the common misconception of 'circular reasoning' starting with God MUST exist . He exists because our reality demands a personal theistic Creator can only be responsible for it. Conversely, the atheist position starts with ONLY NATURAL CAUSES are allowed for everything ...even when absurdities enter the equation because the Divine must automatically be ruled out . We see this in the private lives of common Atheists such as yourself as well as on a more grand scale with notable Evolutionary Professors at a time of honesty :

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment --------------

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.
It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, FOR WE CANNOT ALLOW A DIVINE FOOT IN THE DOOR' .

So much for scientific objectivity. Dave.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 02:05 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 11:36 AM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  
(24-11-2014 10:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, that is not what information is. Information is any kind of event that affects the state of a dynamic system.


No, DNA is not a blueprint for an assembly process and does not contain any goal, nor information in the sense you misunderstand it to be.

Fetal development is growth with continuous morphological change as the chemical environment surrounding the fetus changes.


Chemistry is the answer, not your misunderstanding of information.


We don't know for certain.


No, it doesn't. It is all energy, no matter. Matter does not exist until the universe has expanded and cooled sufficiently.


We don't know for certain.


We don't know for certain, but there are several good hypotheses for abiogenesis, none of which involve rocks giving birth to living life forms.


Physical laws are human descriptions of human observations of the natural world.


Correct, there is no objective morality.


Correct, there is no absolute standard.


No, not quite. Humans evolved as a social species and our feelings of empathy, fairness, caring for our young, sacrificing all evolved because they were beneficial.


Because there are negative consequences for violating society's rules.


Thoughts don't "arise from these atoms", thoughts arise from the complex pattern of chemicals and structures of the brain.

We don't know all the details, but neuroscientists are working on it.


'WE DONT KNOW' was your frequent response ,

Yes, because that is an honest answer.

Quote:yet you DO know that there isn't/cant be any personal theistic intelligent Creator for what we have

Except I never claimed that, did I? Nope. Drinking Beverage
I don't believe in any gods because there is no evidence of anything beyond a naturalistic universe.

Quote:which sure doesn't resemble the atheistic worldview/origins of chaos, haphazard looking effects , accidental compilations of atoms ad nauseum , thrown-together non design, and non suitability for human life --- that's what we should expect from a non-personal / non intelligent / non willed Universe that hasn't a shred of reason or purpose and that occurred 'accidentally' .

Your lack of knowledge of physics, chemistry, mathematics, biology, geology, etc. is manifest in that string of inchoate concepts.

Quote:Perhaps you should rethink your Reverse God of the Gaps creed : "The supernatural doesn't exist (or if it does, it certainly had nothing to do with fashioning a personal Universe and creating life from non-life), therefore some natural process must have caused a personal Universe and caused life to come from non-life.'

There is no evidence of the supernatural so science operates on methodological naturalism.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
25-11-2014, 02:06 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 01:30 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  As for the Dr. Szo video presentation, ill let atheist Prof. Richard Dawkins give answer to it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZtEjtlirc

No you won't. Szostack is a Nobel Prize winner. Stein is an ACTOR.
Do try again child. SPECIFICS. Refute the chemistry, and tell us why it could not have happened. Take your time.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
25-11-2014, 02:10 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 01:30 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  As for the Dr. Szo video presentation, ill let atheist Prof. Richard Dawkins give answer to it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZtEjtlirc

As for Ben Stein, he was a dishonest cunt in that interview, misrepresenting what Dawkins says.

Dawkins says that giving up belief in a god is liberating and Stein then asks why telling people that their belief is wrong is liberating.

Fuck Ben Stein; he's just another liar for Christ.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
25-11-2014, 02:11 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 02:00 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  Absolutely, the Bible is an objective Source of Information on how to live. The very Founders of our Nation thought so...even Jefferson who was a Deist for the most part. The Founders written correspondence regarding biblical principles and ideology amounts to 30% of ALL their communication. Further, The Bible records specific scientific processes and facts written down 3-4,000 years ago which modern science finally got around to confirming as absolute truth. Lastly, The Bible has changed countless lives for the better because its authority is far higher than Mans self centered Humanist ideologies which leads to destruction. Its a shame you have such hatred and hostility toward it and the Creator who inspired it .

All bullshit. YOU have to PROVE it point by point. The Founders were not scholars of ancient Near Eastern Literature, or the Bible. Are you like 12 ?
Archaeology has proven a lot in the Bible to be completely false in the last 50 years. Do try harder, child. Saying "absolutely" is worthless. You must PROVE it, with examples. I can prove it's FALSE.




One cannot "hate" and be "hostile" to that which does not exist. Your god is a fairy story. Nothing more. Coutless lves have been changed by the Quran also. Does THAT make it true ? You are such a joke.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 02:15 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 02:00 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  
(25-11-2014 01:44 PM)unfogged Wrote:  The bible is an objective source of information? Laughat


I've known at least a few atheists that say that they genuinely wish that there was a creator but that the lack of evidence forces them to admit that it isn't rational to believe that. Most atheists I know, including me, don't actually consider the question of whether they'd like there to be a god or not, they just follow the evidence. If it turned out that there was evidence to support the conclusion they would accept it.

You really have no clue what atheism entails. It's sad because you seem like you are probably pretty intelligent and if you could bring yourself to look at the "evidence" without the prior assumption that god exists and the bible is accurate you would see what a house of cards it all is.

Absolutely, the Bible is an objective Source of Information on how to live. The very Founders of our Nation thought so...even Jefferson who was a Deist for the most part. The Founders written correspondence regarding biblical principles and ideology amounts to 30% of ALL their communication. Further, The Bible records specific scientific processes and facts written down 3-4,000 years ago which modern science finally got around to confirming as absolute truth. Lastly, The Bible has changed countless lives for the better because its authority is far higher than Mans self centered Humanist ideologies which leads to destruction. Its a shame you have such hatred and hostility toward it and the Creator who inspired it .

As an evidential Christian Apologist, I make my case for a personal Creator from the established scientific evidence and not from the common misconception of 'circular reasoning' starting with God MUST exist . He exists because our reality demands a personal theistic Creator can only be responsible for it. Conversely, the atheist position starts with ONLY NATURAL CAUSES are allowed for everything ...even when absurdities enter the equation because the Divine must automatically be ruled out . We see this in the private lives of common Atheists such as yourself as well as on a more grand scale with notable Evolutionary Professors at a time of honesty :

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment --------------

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.
It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, FOR WE CANNOT ALLOW A DIVINE FOOT IN THE DOOR' .

So much for scientific objectivity. Dave.

Goddamn, I’m having to chase this dick all over the forum because he keeps spamming the same shit.

See here

You are disingenuous Dave. I see your many years of cherry-picking the Bibble has not been wasted. Rolleyes

Original Quote

"With great perception, Sagan sees that there is an impediment to the popular credibility of scientific claims about the world, an impediment that is almost invisible to most scientists. Many of the most fundamental claims of science are against common sense and seem absurd on their face. Do physicists really expect me to accept without serious qualms that the pungent cheese that I had for lunch is really made up of tiny, tasteless, odorless, colorless packets of energy with nothing but empty space between them? Astronomers tell us without apparent embarrassment that they can see stellar events that occurred millions of years ago, whereas we all know that we see things as they happen. When, at the time of the moon landing, a woman in rural Texas was interviewed about the event, she very sensibly refused to believe that the television pictures she had seen had come all the way from the moon, on the grounds that with her antenna she couldn't even get Dallas. What seems absurd depends on one's prejudice. Carl Sagan accepts, as I do, the duality of light, which is at the same time wave and particle, but he thinks that the consubstantiality of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost puts the mystery of the Holy Trinity "in deep trouble." Two’s company, but three's a crowd.

Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen.”

Comment

Answers in Genesis makes it appear as if by "patent absurdity", Lewontin means evolution, when he is really talking about astronomy.
Gitt makes it appear as if Lewontin thinks that materialism cannot be justified and is a personal decision. But in reality Lewontin gives a reason just after creationists stop quoting him.
Also, many scientists will disagree with him in the detail creationists are emphasizing, and say that methodological naturalism is a necessary component of science, giving exactly the reason Lewontin gave.

http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/Lewontin_on_materialism

You may also want to check this page full of creationists misquotes Dave just in case you were planning on using any of them. You may be able to fool yourself and your sheeple easily but we here actually think our way through life. Try being original next time.

http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/Category:C..._misquotes

I would think this falls under spamming.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Full Circle's post
25-11-2014, 02:29 PM (This post was last modified: 25-11-2014 02:43 PM by grizzlysnake.)
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 02:00 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  Further, The Bible records specific scientific processes and facts written down 3-4,000 years ago which modern science finally got around to confirming as absolute truth.
The Quran plays that game to Big Grin http://www.missionislam.com/science/book.htm
Just run a search you'll find loads more. Maybe you can go to an Islam forum and swap stories, I'm sure you'll get some converts.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 02:30 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 02:00 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  
(25-11-2014 01:44 PM)unfogged Wrote:  The bible is an objective source of information? Laughat


I've known at least a few atheists that say that they genuinely wish that there was a creator but that the lack of evidence forces them to admit that it isn't rational to believe that. Most atheists I know, including me, don't actually consider the question of whether they'd like there to be a god or not, they just follow the evidence. If it turned out that there was evidence to support the conclusion they would accept it.

You really have no clue what atheism entails. It's sad because you seem like you are probably pretty intelligent and if you could bring yourself to look at the "evidence" without the prior assumption that god exists and the bible is accurate you would see what a house of cards it all is.

Absolutely, the Bible is an objective Source of Information on how to live. The very Founders of our Nation thought so...even Jefferson who was a Deist for the most part. The Founders written correspondence regarding biblical principles and ideology amounts to 30% of ALL their communication. Further, The Bible records specific scientific processes and facts written down 3-4,000 years ago which modern science finally got around to confirming as absolute truth. Lastly, The Bible has changed countless lives for the better because its authority is far higher than Mans self centered Humanist ideologies which leads to destruction. Its a shame you have such hatred and hostility toward it and the Creator who inspired it .

As an evidential Christian Apologist, I make my case for a personal Creator from the established scientific evidence and not from the common misconception of 'circular reasoning' starting with God MUST exist . He exists because our reality demands a personal theistic Creator can only be responsible for it. Conversely, the atheist position starts with ONLY NATURAL CAUSES are allowed for everything ...even when absurdities enter the equation because the Divine must automatically be ruled out . We see this in the private lives of common Atheists such as yourself as well as on a more grand scale with notable Evolutionary Professors at a time of honesty :

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment --------------

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.
It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, FOR WE CANNOT ALLOW A DIVINE FOOT IN THE DOOR' .

So much for scientific objectivity. Dave.

Liar. Jefferson did not like the Bible. He cut it up and rewrote it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible

Many of the other Founders hated religion, and the Bible.
Here's a few quotes for you child.
http://zenhell.com/GetEnlightened/FoundingFathers/

Thomas Jefferson

"But the greatest of all reformers of the depraved religion of his own country, was Jesus of Nazareth. Abstracting what is really his from the rubbish in which it is buried, easily distinguished by its lustre from the dross of his biographers, and as separable from that as the diamond from the dunghill, we have the outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man. The establishment of the innocent and genuine character of this benevolent morality, and the rescuing it from the imputation of imposture, which has resulted from artificial systems, invented by ultra-Christian sects (The immaculate conception of Jesus, his deification, the creation of the world by him, his miraculous powers, his resurrection and visible ascension, his corporeal presence in the Eucharist, the Trinity; original sin, atonement, regeneration, election, orders of the Hierarchy, etc.) is a most desirable object."
..........To W. Short, Oct. 31, 1819

"The Christian god is a three headed monster, cruel, vengeful, and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."

"I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature."

"Christianity...(has become) the most perverted system that ever shone on man. ...Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and importers led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus."

I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and state.
..........Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, January 1, 1802

"Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, 'a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;' the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination."

"When we see religion split into so many thousands of sects, and I may say Christianity itself divided into it's thousands also, who are disputing, anathematizing, and where the laws permit, burning and torturing one another for abstractions which no one of them understand, and which are indeed beyond the comprehension of the human mind, into which of the chambers of this Bedlam would a man wish to thrust himself. The sum of all religion as expressed by it's best preacher, 'fear god and love thy neighbor,' contains
no mystery, needs no explanation - but this wont do. It gives no scope to make dupes; priests could not live by it."
..........Letter to George Logan, November 12, 1816

"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose."
..........To Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814

"Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth."
.........."Notes on Virginia"

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."
..........To Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787

"It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one. But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests."
..........To John Adams, 1803

"But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State."
..........To S. Kercheval, 1810

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
..........To Baron von Humboldt, 1813

"On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind."
..........To Carey, 1816

"It is not to be understood that I am with him (Jesus Christ) in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism; he preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it. Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others, again, of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being. I separate, therefore, the gold from the dross; restore him to the former, and leave the latter to the stupidity of some, the roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and imposters, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and the first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus."
..........To W. Short, 1820

"The office of reformer of the superstitions of a nation, is ever more dangerous. Jesus had to work on the perilous confines of reason and religion; and a step to the right or left might place him within the grasp of the priests of the superstition, a bloodthirsty race, as cruel and remorseless as the being whom they represented as the family God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob, and the local God of Israel. That Jesus did not mean to impose himself on mankind as the son of God, physically speaking, I have been convinced by the writings of men more learned than myself in that lore."
..........To Story, Aug. 4, 1820

"The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man. But compare with these the demoralizing dogmas of Calvin.
1. That there are three Gods.
2. That good works, or the love of our neighbor, is nothing.
3. That faith is every thing, and the more incomprehensible the proposition, the more merit the faith.
4. That reason in religion is of unlawful use.
5. That God, from the beginning, elected certain individuals to be saved, and certain others to be damned; and that no crimes of the former can damn them; no virtues of the latter save."
..........To Benjamin Waterhouse, Jun. 26, 1822

"Creeds have been the bane of the Christian church ... made of Christendom a slaughter-house."
..........To Benjamin Waterhouse, Jun. 26, 1822

"The truth is, that the greatest enemies of the doctrine of Jesus are those, calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them to the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come, when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."
..........To John Adams, Apr. 11, 1823

"The metaphysical insanities of Athanasius, of Loyola, and of Calvin, are, to my understanding, mere lapses into polytheism, differing from paganism only by being more unintelligible."
..........To Jared Sparks, 1820

John Adams

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
..........To F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
..........To Thomas Jefferson

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like Bucky Ball's post
25-11-2014, 02:45 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 02:00 PM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  Absolutely, the Bible is an objective Source of Information on how to live.

The bible reflects the opinions of the bronze and iron age people who wrote it and the medieval people who edited it. Being humans they got some things right but they got some things wrong. Read without presupposition that it is perfect it comes across as pretty barbaric.

Quote:The very Founders of our Nation thought so...even Jefferson who was a Deist for the most part. The Founders written correspondence regarding biblical principles and ideology amounts to 30% of ALL their communication.

And when they drafted the framework for the country they were putting together they mentioned god 3 times: (1) no establishment of religion, (2) no religious test for office, and (3) the date based on the common convention of the time.

They took inspiration from many sources and there's nothing good that they got from Christianity that they couldn't have gotten from earlier sources.Luckily for us they saw how pernicious religion is and barred it from government.

Quote: Further, The Bible records specific scientific processes and facts written down 3-4,000 years ago which modern science finally got around to confirming as absolute truth.

Citations? Muslims make the same baseless claim for the Koran. A vague sentence that can be twisted to appear to relate to something discovered later is not proof of knowledge of scientific facts.

Quote:Lastly, The Bible has changed countless lives for the better because its authority is far higher than Mans self centered Humanist ideologies which leads to destruction. Its a shame you have such hatred and hostility toward it and the Creator who inspired it .

I can not hate what I do not believe exists. Please also explain why secular countries around the world score higher on measures of happiness and social stability than Christian countries? By the way, humanism is not atheism. There are atheists who are not humanists and theists who are and that's been explained many times. The fact that you won't understand this simple thing shows that you are too wrapped in your own delusion to think clearly.

Quote:As an evidential Christian Apologist, I make my case for a personal Creator from the established scientific evidence and not from the common misconception of 'circular reasoning' starting with God MUST exist . He exists because our reality demands a personal theistic Creator can only be responsible for it.

That's pretty funny. Your limited ability to imagine alternatives is not proof of anything but your own limited mind.

Quote:Conversely, the atheist position starts with ONLY NATURAL CAUSES are allowed for everything ...even when absurdities enter the equation because the Divine must automatically be ruled out . We see this in the private lives of common Atheists such as yourself as well as on a more grand scale with notable Evolutionary Professors at a time of honesty :

No, atheists start with the evidence and go from there. If and when evidence leads towards the supernatural it will be considered along with the rest. So far that hasn't happened. You are confusing the way we think with the way theists approach questions. Also, since your favorite quote has already been shown to be taken out of context you should probably stop posting it. It just makes you look even more foolish.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: