my introduction
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-07-2015, 04:08 AM
my introduction
Hello! Hope you are well. I will be brief with my introductory comment. An atheist by one definition is merely somebody who does not believe in the other person or group's or society's god(s). I used to think an atheist was a person who had a conviction in the belief that there was no supernatural diety, and instead who would put their faith in Naturalism and specifically evolutionism. For, instance, Christians in ancient Rome were called atheists because they didn't believe in the numerous pagan dieties of ancient Romans. In that same regard, I am an athiest - - I do not believe in the dominant religion in America among the elitist educators and elitist scientists and liberal-socialist class, namely, Secular Humanism. I am a conservative, Bible-believing Christian who does believe in a supernatural God who created as recorded in the Biblical Genesis account. I also believe that creationist scientists have got it correct in their interpretation of empirical facts.

I came to this site while doing a Google search and found "Science Disproves Evolution" as a post on this site.

I have a BA in Anthropology and worked a computer programmer analyst for 18 years. I participated in an excavation of the Paluxy River beds trying to find fossil footprints made by ancient men in 1988. I am married with three children.Shy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 05:05 AM
RE: my introduction
Welcome aboard.

Smile

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 09:02 AM
RE: my introduction
Welcome!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 09:33 AM (This post was last modified: 18-07-2015 09:45 AM by Peebothuhul.)
RE: my introduction
Hello! Big Grin

(18-07-2015 04:08 AM)thinkerman Wrote:  Hello! Hope you are well. I will be brief with my introductory comment. An atheist by one definition is merely somebody who does not believe in the other person or group's or society's god(s). I used to think an atheist was a person who had a conviction in the belief that there was no supernatural diety, and instead who would put their faith in Naturalism and specifically evolutionism. For, instance, Christians in ancient Rome were called atheists because they didn't believe in the numerous pagan dieties of ancient Romans. In that same regard, I am an athiest - - I do not believe in the dominant religion in America among the elitist educators and elitist scientists and liberal-socialist class, namely, Secular Humanism. I am a conservative, Bible-believing Christian who does believe in a supernatural God who created as recorded in the Biblical Genesis account. I also believe that creationist scientists have got it correct in their interpretation of empirical facts.

I came to this site while doing a Google search and found "Science Disproves Evolution" as a post on this site.

I have a BA in Anthropology and worked a computer programmer analyst for 18 years. I participated in an excavation of the Paluxy River beds trying to find fossil footprints made by ancient men in 1988. I am married with three children.

I'm sure you'll have much to discuss and compare with others here.

I think you'll find folks here would give a broader (In a sense) definition of atheism. They will also point out the different 'grades' of such a as well (Some one has a naffy link to a neat chart of the four or so types)

As for your... name calling... of people of different professions? I find that.. odd.

I don't go around calling my car mechanic 'elitist'. Even though they have technical skills far beyond my own in certain areas.

I also think you'll find other who will point out that 'Secular humanist' is neither a religion, nor really connected to atheism either.

Please feel free to share your ideas about what you consider a deity is/has/proprieties their of. Perhaps starting a new thread as it would be more of a discussion and no longer an introduction.

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 09:38 AM
RE: my introduction
Welcome!

“[Science] works! Planes fly. Cars drive. Computers compute. If you base medicine on science, you cure people. If you base the design of planes on science, they fly. If you base the design of rockets on science, they reach the moon. It works...bitches.” - Richie D Da Illest
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 10:45 AM
RE: my introduction
Welcome
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 11:10 AM
RE: my introduction
I am a Secular Humanist, and strongly disagree with your assertions about it, though I am a liberal. It's not a dirty word.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 12:00 PM
RE: my introduction
(18-07-2015 04:08 AM)thinkerman Wrote:  Hello! Hope you are well. I will be brief with my introductory comment. An atheist by one definition is merely somebody who does not believe in the other person or group's or society's god(s). I used to think an atheist was a person who had a conviction in the belief that there was no supernatural diety, and instead who would put their faith in Naturalism and specifically evolutionism. For, instance, Christians in ancient Rome were called atheists because they didn't believe in the numerous pagan dieties of ancient Romans. In that same regard, I am an athiest - - I do not believe in the dominant religion in America among the elitist educators and elitist scientists and liberal-socialist class, namely, Secular Humanism. I am a conservative, Bible-believing Christian who does believe in a supernatural God who created as recorded in the Biblical Genesis account. I also believe that creationist scientists have got it correct in their interpretation of empirical facts.

I came to this site while doing a Google search and found "Science Disproves Evolution" as a post on this site.

I have a BA in Anthropology and worked a computer programmer analyst for 18 years. I participated in an excavation of the Paluxy River beds trying to find fossil footprints made by ancient men in 1988. I am married with three children.Shy

Welcome aboard! I look forward to watching you articulate, validate and substantiate your beliefs. Yes

Thumbsup

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2015, 01:57 PM
RE: my introduction
Welcome - I look forward to your presentation of actual evidence. Drinking Beverage

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
19-07-2015, 03:14 AM
RE: my introduction
Hello again! I may not be contributing to The Thinking Atheist often because I am a nurse taking care of my handicapped wife 24/7 365 days/year and I can only get onto the computer to participate in your forum when she is asleep.

I have never been an atheist in the usual sense of the word of not having a conviction that a supernatural creative entity called God exists and can be perceived by His creatures as self evident and in some cases very personal. I was born in 1950 before school prayer and public prayer was hijacked by the ACLU types. My parents and relatives accepted a priori that God was self existing from eternity and, since we were protestants, God was the diety who revealed himself in the Bible - a monotheistic/triune personal God.

However, I was a Christian Humanist without knowing what that was until I reached halfway through college (Ohio State University, 1970-1974). Christian Humanism is, for those unfamiliar with it, Christian flavored Humanism, with Humanism being the core belief system mixed with incompatible parts of Chistianity, like oil in water. The person afflicted with irrational admixture is probably unaware of this internal conflict of ideas, as I was.

My journey of enlightenment, if you will, began when I read Dr Henry Morris's book, Scientific Creationism and The Genesis Record. I began to see that real scientists who were honest modified their understanding of reality as they investigated the natural word using the scientific method. I also came to understand that some dishonest scientists could even be bigots by blatant discriminating against fellow scientists and forming legal/political entities (ACLU or NSF) to suppress opposing views - -not for sound scientific reasons but for deeply held religious or philosophical reasons. As you well know, most of the founding fathers of modern science accepted the presupposition that God exists and He created the natural world with order and laws which can be investigated and described using the scientific method. That began to change with evolutionary philosophy through Darwinism. Thus the current clash of Creationism vsersus Evolutionism with the latter seeming to have the winning scientifc arguments. But, the widespread bigotry among many leaders in Evolution camp became more apparent as they succeeded in shutting down or discriminated against scientists who disagreed with their viewpoint and worldview. Case in point: Dr Jerry Bergman, who was an award winning teacher and researcher at Bowling Green University who was rejected by the evolutionist professors from getting tenure after they found out that he had written extracurricular materials about creation science. Dr Bergman has written a booklet documenting many other cases of this bigotry. He teaches at another university in northern Ohio.

In my own experience while attending OSU, I found that the book banners threw out a number of books on creation scientists which I had attempted to donate to the OSU main library. I coauthored a article in the OSU student paper, The lantern which listed bullets of scientific evidence supporting creation science and describing it as no more religious than evolution science. Two of my fomer Anthropology teachers came out of the woodwork, so to speak, in fierce opposition to that newpaper article. One teacher I learne,d from a letter he sent to me, was a warlock who belonged to the Church of Anthropology and another wicthcraft religious society in Africa. He threatened to psychometamorphize me into the body of a seal. The other woman teacher turned out to be Wiccan witch who worships nature. It also stirred up the ACLU and some activist athiests who threatened our local Columbus Ohio school board with lawsuits if they continued to allow science teachers the option of presenting both evolutuon and creation science arguments to students.

The anger of my former Anthropology teachers and others (skeptics, atheists, agnostics, etc) is primarily directed as my assertion that scientists who believe in God and especially the Biblical account of Genesis are true scientists; and, that modern science was not based upon evolution ideology but on the axiomatic belief that a supernatural intelligent designer God established natural order and laws that can be explored and described in an empirical, objective method. Both are indisputable facts by any reaonable person. It appears to me, that the meaning of "science" and "scientists" were hijacked in a misinformation campaign by evolutionist apologists,which continues today, and has been institutionalized with the help of courts and big monied, social change agents. By attempting to control these definitions and suppressing any challenges, they hypocritcally claim scientists and teachers have academic and constitutional freedfom of speech and exchange of ideas, but in practice they fight to deny any opponents of their worldview that same feedom.

As Dr Henry Morris (father of the Creation Science Movement) said (to paraphrase him), if evolution were actually empirically demonstrable by observation and replicable experiments, every rational person would accept it as fact, like we do that the earth is round, or the Law of Biogensis - only life come from life (not spontaneous generation of life), or them Periodic Table and general laws of physics. What is often lost in the creation/evolution debate that impinges on everyone's worldview, is that both Genesis by supernatural creation or naturalistic evolution are forensic or historic science, and neither can be proven by empirical scientific methods because those original processes are not operating today but only in the prehistoric past.
The scientific facts are available to both creationist and evolutionist camps; what differs is the a prior assumptions and untestable presuppositions which govern how each group interprets those facts.

Sorry for this commentary being so long.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: