No Such Thing as an Atheist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-02-2010, 06:49 PM
 
No Such Thing as an Atheist
No such thing as an atheist.

Judith Hayes in 2001 wrote an article http://www.thehappyheretic.com/06-01.htm that there is no such thing as an agnostic. I believe there is no such thing as an atheist.

There is no question that Jesus was on earth, there is huge amount of historical data, Biblical data, and other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam acknowledge Him. The Qur’an mentions Jesus 25 times. You could be an AG-JESUS if there is such a thing, saying you have no knowledge of Him. But to be an A-JESUS would be foolish. You do not have to follow his teachings to believe there was a person named Jesus.

Same thing with God, there is way too much evidence that supports God. Let’s take just one aspect of evolution. The simplest known living organism has over 500 amino acids. When amino acids form, they are less than one-millionth the size of a human hair. Scientists have found that all non-living amino acids form with 50% of side atoms on the right side of the acid and 50% on the left. This is true on all non-living amino acids. Living cells can ONLY contain amino acids on the left side. ALL amino acids found in every single living cell contain only left-sided amino acids. In the most favorable environment of scientific labs, this has never been duplicated. No scientist has ever created the left-handed amino acid that is critical to the formation of life. All amino acids always form with left and right sided atoms. If the scientist in perfect conditions can't duplicate one single left-sided amino acid, how could the 500 necessary for life form by chance? The scientific odds of even one left-sided amino acid forming by chance is 10 to the 123rd power 1 chance in 10 followed by 123 zeros. That is only one of the 500 amino acids necessary for the simplest life form. 20 specific amino acids are needed for the simplest cell, but 500 in order for life to sustain it. The odds get worse. Those 500 different types of amino acids have to 'evolve' within a fraction of a millimeter of each other just to give them the chance of uniting. It gets worse. They also have to 'by chance' evolve at the exact same moment in time in a process that scientist say takes hundreds of millions of years. Elements break down the amino acids, so timing is critical. The chances of all these resources falling into place at the exact same time with the exact needed elements at the exact same place on earth within a few millionths of a millimeter of each other are ZERO! And that is just for the amino acids, forget the odds of coming up with a human body. The following article from NASA explains a little about that, read the last few paragraphs about the conclusion.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news..._life.html

If atheists were intellectually honest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty they would acknowledge that there is a God that they have no knowledge of, and if they get the knowledge that he exists, then reject him for what He has done to His creation.
Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 06:53 PM
 
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
I'm having a hard time following.
Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 07:01 PM
 
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
As fast as you responded there is no way you could have read the articles I sighted or gave it one minute of thought. Please read the articles, one from an atheist and one from NASA, and let's have a discussion.
Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 07:28 PM
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
(22-02-2010 06:49 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  I believe there is no such thing as an atheist.

Just gonna say it right now. If you believe that atheists do not exist, then you are simply in denial.

Quote:There is no question that Jesus was on earth

Yes, there is.

Quote:there is huge amount of historical data

Such as?

Quote:Biblical data

Which is circular logic. You can't use the Bible to prove the claims made in the Bible.

Quote:and other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam acknowledge Him.

False.

Quote:The Qur’an mentions Jesus 25 times.

So you believe that the Qu'ran is a reliable document now?

Quote:You could be an AG-JESUS if there is such a thing, saying you have no knowledge of Him. But to be an A-JESUS would be foolish.

Not really, as there is no real case for his existence.

Quote:You do not have to follow his teachings to believe there was a person named Jesus.

True.

Quote:Same thing with God, there is way too much evidence that supports God.

Such as?

Quote:Let’s take just one aspect of evolution. The simplest known living organism has over 500 amino acids. When amino acids form, they are less than one-millionth the size of a human hair. Scientists have found that all non-living amino acids form with 50% of side atoms on the right side of the acid and 50% on the left. This is true on all non-living amino acids. Living cells can ONLY contain amino acids on the left side. ALL amino acids found in every single living cell contain only left-sided amino acids.

No. They contain mostly left-handed amino acids. Several types of bacterial organisms use right-handed acids, for example.

Quote:In the most favorable environment of scientific labs, this has never been duplicated. No scientist has ever created the left-handed amino acid that is critical to the formation of life.

This is also false. The Miller-Urey experiment created several left-handed acids.

Quote:If the scientist in perfect conditions can't duplicate one single left-sided amino acid, how could the 500 necessary for life form by chance?

Argument from personal incredulity, argument from ignorance.

Quote:The scientific odds of even one left-sided amino acid forming by chance is 10 to the 123rd power 1 chance in 10 followed by 123 zeros.

How were these odds calculated?

Quote:Those 500 different types of amino acids have to 'evolve' within a fraction of a millimeter of each other just to give them the chance of uniting.

Except that they didn't. They only had to come together at some point. It didn't necessarily have to be immediately following their creation.

Quote:They also have to 'by chance' evolve at the exact same moment in time in a process that scientist say takes hundreds of millions of years.

Again, it doesn't have to be immediate.

Quote:Elements break down the amino acids, so timing is critical.

How fast do the acids break down? What elements cause them to break down? What evidence is there that these elements were pervasive during the formation of said acids?

Quote:The chances of all these resources falling into place at the exact same time with the exact needed elements at the exact same place on earth within a few millionths of a millimeter of each other are ZERO!

Even if everything up to this point were correct, this would be wrong. The odds would be extremely remote, certainly, but not zero. And that would leave them one point up on your god.

Quote:And that is just for the amino acids, forget the odds of coming up with a human body.

Despite all the creationist straw men, chance is not the main driving force of evolution. As soon as the first life form came into being, the only time that chance was involved was during replication, when it determined if the resultant new life form had a mutation.

Quote:If atheists were intellectually honest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty they would acknowledge that there is a God that they have no knowledge of, and if they get the knowledge that he exists, then reject him for what He has done to His creation.

If you were intellectually honest, you would have actually done some research before posting this drivel.
There's also the fact that, even if the existence of God were as obvious as you maintain, atheists could still very well exist. You can find idiots who believe - or disbelieve - anything, so your position is still baseless.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 07:42 PM
 
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
lol yeah guess thats about all that needs to be said. Smile
Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 07:44 PM
 
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
What evidence of Jesus' existence? Honestly, I've never seen or heard that there is any evidence that wasn't biblical proving he existed. From Zeitgeist:
Quote:"There are numerous historians who lived in and around the Mediterranean either during or soon after the assumed life of Jesus. How many of these historians document this figure? Not one.[...]"
"You would think that a guy who rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven for all eyes to see and performed the wealth of miracles acclaimed to him would have made it into the historical record. It didn't because once the evidence is weighed, there are very high odds that the figure known as Jesus, did not even exist"
Of course, you could always question the sources of the makers of that film. What strong evidence is there that would certainly convince me that he really existed?

You say:
Quote:"The chances of all these resources falling into place at the exact same time with the exact needed elements at the exact same place on earth within a few millionths of a millimeter of each other are ZERO"
But from what you said before, it's not zero. It's incredibly small, approaching zero, but not zero. Still possible. Right?
You present a rather interesting point though. The theory of the origins of life is widely supported by observable evidence. Yet, if an alternative theory rose, a theory that answers more questions than it generates and presents even more evidence, then we'd move forward, accept we were wrong and keep the search for the truth based on this new theory.
From Richard Dawkins' "Root of all evil"
Quote:I do remember one formative influence in my undergraduate life. There was an elderly professor in my department who had been passionately keen on a particular theory for, oh, a number of years, and one day an American visiting researcher came and he completely and utterly disproved our old man's hypothesis. The old man strode to the front, shook his hand and said, "My dear fellow, I wish to thank you, I have been wrong these fifteen years". And we all clapped our hands raw. That was the scientific ideal, of somebody who had a lot invested, a lifetime almost invested in a theory, and he was rejoicing that he had been shown wrong and that scientific truth had been advanced. (Part 1, 00:13:32)
I can assure you that if I presented overwelming evidence that would completely and utterly disprove God's existence, you'd still wouldn't believe in it. Believing in God does not require evidence, that's the thing. So no matter how much evidence there is, either in favor or not, it wouldn't make a difference.
Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 08:20 PM
 
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
(22-02-2010 06:49 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  No such thing as an atheist.

Judith Hayes in 2001 wrote an article http://www.thehappyheretic.com/06-01.htm that there is no such thing as an agnostic. I believe there is no such thing as an atheist.

There is no question that Jesus was on earth, there is huge amount of historical data, Biblical data, and other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam acknowledge Him. The Qur’an mentions Jesus 25 times. You could be an AG-JESUS if there is such a thing, saying you have no knowledge of Him. But to be an A-JESUS would be foolish. You do not have to follow his teachings to believe there was a person named Jesus.

Same thing with God, there is way too much evidence that supports God. Let’s take just one aspect of evolution. The simplest known living organism has over 500 amino acids. When amino acids form, they are less than one-millionth the size of a human hair. Scientists have found that all non-living amino acids form with 50% of side atoms on the right side of the acid and 50% on the left. This is true on all non-living amino acids. Living cells can ONLY contain amino acids on the left side. ALL amino acids found in every single living cell contain only left-sided amino acids. In the most favorable environment of scientific labs, this has never been duplicated. No scientist has ever created the left-handed amino acid that is critical to the formation of life. All amino acids always form with left and right sided atoms. If the scientist in perfect conditions can't duplicate one single left-sided amino acid, how could the 500 necessary for life form by chance? The scientific odds of even one left-sided amino acid forming by chance is 10 to the 123rd power 1 chance in 10 followed by 123 zeros. That is only one of the 500 amino acids necessary for the simplest life form. 20 specific amino acids are needed for the simplest cell, but 500 in order for life to sustain it. The odds get worse. Those 500 different types of amino acids have to 'evolve' within a fraction of a millimeter of each other just to give them the chance of uniting. It gets worse. They also have to 'by chance' evolve at the exact same moment in time in a process that scientist say takes hundreds of millions of years. Elements break down the amino acids, so timing is critical. The chances of all these resources falling into place at the exact same time with the exact needed elements at the exact same place on earth within a few millionths of a millimeter of each other are ZERO! And that is just for the amino acids, forget the odds of coming up with a human body. The following article from NASA explains a little about that, read the last few paragraphs about the conclusion.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news..._life.html

If atheists were intellectually honest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty they would acknowledge that there is a God that they have no knowledge of, and if they get the knowledge that he exists, then reject him for what He has done to His creation.

'Jesus' wasn't the first and only 'resurrection' story...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/...ref=slogin

Based on the story attached, "...the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time." Although this doesn't disprove his existence (although there isn't much pointing to him actually existing aside from the bible), it does disprove the uniqueness of the resurrection story. Adding my own two cents, the story of resurrection of a 'key figure' in Jewish society may have helped the case if their civilization was trying to overcome oppression. The oppressors of the time would have had a very hard time disproving the resurrection, whereas we can disprove resurrection (it supposedly hasn't happened in 2000 years, science shows it isn't possible).

Also, if you ready Friedrich Nietzsche's Antichrist, he postulates a number of ideas on how Christianity started (indicates that Paul was pissed at the Jewish priesthood and "...Paul used the promise of life after death as a way to seize tyrannical power over the masses of lower class people".

I don't want to paste more about the book...here's the Wikipedia link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Antichrist_(book)

As for the rest of your points, I believe Unbeliever (!) made very good (and very relevant ones) against your arguments.
Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 08:50 PM
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
I get into this argument a lot on a lot of websites against a lot of people. In fact, I just finished arguing against it on the Facebook Apologetics board. So... yeah. I get a lot of practice, and I have the rebuttals necessary to any point that an a-atheist is likely to raise on hand for immediate access. So far, not a single one of them has ever been able to prove that I don't exist.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 09:01 PM
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
I can see that Unbeliever, Nahuel, and others have explained the flaws within your logic, and the misinformation there is. It seems that a huge chunk of your post is irreducible complexity, which has never held up. Here is another article to throw into the mix. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html
I come here to socialize with other atheists, so I will end here.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2010, 10:23 PM
 
RE: No Such Thing as an Atheist
(22-02-2010 08:50 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  I get into this argument a lot on a lot of websites against a lot of people. In fact, I just finished arguing against it on the Facebook Apologetics board. So... yeah. I get a lot of practice, and I have the rebuttals necessary to any point that an a-atheist is likely to raise on hand for immediate access. So far, not a single one of them has ever been able to prove that I don't exist.

You do exist, but if you were honest you would call yourself agnostic
(22-02-2010 08:20 PM)supermanlives1973 Wrote:  
(22-02-2010 06:49 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  No such thing as an atheist.

Judith Hayes in 2001 wrote an article http://www.thehappyheretic.com/06-01.htm that there is no such thing as an agnostic. I believe there is no such thing as an atheist.

There is no question that Jesus was on earth, there is huge amount of historical data, Biblical data, and other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam acknowledge Him. The Qur’an mentions Jesus 25 times. You could be an AG-JESUS if there is such a thing, saying you have no knowledge of Him. But to be an A-JESUS would be foolish. You do not have to follow his teachings to believe there was a person named Jesus.

Same thing with God, there is way too much evidence that supports God. Let’s take just one aspect of evolution. The simplest known living organism has over 500 amino acids. When amino acids form, they are less than one-millionth the size of a human hair. Scientists have found that all non-living amino acids form with 50% of side atoms on the right side of the acid and 50% on the left. This is true on all non-living amino acids. Living cells can ONLY contain amino acids on the left side. ALL amino acids found in every single living cell contain only left-sided amino acids. In the most favorable environment of scientific labs, this has never been duplicated. No scientist has ever created the left-handed amino acid that is critical to the formation of life. All amino acids always form with left and right sided atoms. If the scientist in perfect conditions can't duplicate one single left-sided amino acid, how could the 500 necessary for life form by chance? The scientific odds of even one left-sided amino acid forming by chance is 10 to the 123rd power 1 chance in 10 followed by 123 zeros. That is only one of the 500 amino acids necessary for the simplest life form. 20 specific amino acids are needed for the simplest cell, but 500 in order for life to sustain it. The odds get worse. Those 500 different types of amino acids have to 'evolve' within a fraction of a millimeter of each other just to give them the chance of uniting. It gets worse. They also have to 'by chance' evolve at the exact same moment in time in a process that scientist say takes hundreds of millions of years. Elements break down the amino acids, so timing is critical. The chances of all these resources falling into place at the exact same time with the exact needed elements at the exact same place on earth within a few millionths of a millimeter of each other are ZERO! And that is just for the amino acids, forget the odds of coming up with a human body. The following article from NASA explains a little about that, read the last few paragraphs about the conclusion.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news..._life.html

If atheists were intellectually honest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty they would acknowledge that there is a God that they have no knowledge of, and if they get the knowledge that he exists, then reject him for what He has done to His creation.

'Jesus' wasn't the first and only 'resurrection' story...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/...ref=slogin

Based on the story attached, "...the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time." Although this doesn't disprove his existence (although there isn't much pointing to him actually existing aside from the bible), it does disprove the uniqueness of the resurrection story. Adding my own two cents, the story of resurrection of a 'key figure' in Jewish society may have helped the case if their civilization was trying to overcome oppression. The oppressors of the time would have had a very hard time disproving the resurrection, whereas we can disprove resurrection (it supposedly hasn't happened in 2000 years, science shows it isn't possible).

Also, if you ready Friedrich Nietzsche's Antichrist, he postulates a number of ideas on how Christianity started (indicates that Paul was pissed at the Jewish priesthood and "...Paul used the promise of life after death as a way to seize tyrannical power over the masses of lower class people".

I don't want to paste more about the book...here's the Wikipedia link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Antichrist_(book)

As for the rest of your points, I believe Unbeliever (!) made very good (and very relevant ones) against your arguments.

I am writing my response then let me know if it is relevant
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: