Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9035 total)
101 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1 (2 members, 99 visitors)
Newest Member: Barry Deaborough
Post Volume: Total: 885,592 Year: 3,238/14,102 Month: 179/724 Week: 28/93 Day: 28/22 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is science atheism?
Phat
Member
Posts: 15361
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 16 of 104 (886173)
05-09-2021 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by ringo
05-09-2021 11:01 AM


The Correct Term is Oppression, not Possession.
No more rude than it is for you to mock my capability to judge something as real or fake. I reject 90% of what I see out there. Only when I experience it first hand do I even attempt to explain it. And just because my explanation isn't outright rejection based on known evidence makes my assessment no less valid than yours.

One key giveaway regarding oppression is an innate hatred of Jesus Christ or disdain for His necessity.An atheist wouldn't care any more than they would if a Leprechaun were being critiqued. An anti theist sees the very idea of God incarnate as laughable yet also a very real threat to social progress.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by ringo, posted 05-09-2021 11:01 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by ringo, posted 05-09-2021 9:30 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33343
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 17 of 104 (886180)
05-09-2021 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Phat
05-09-2021 3:20 PM


Phat writes:

Just because you've never seen it in front of your face gives you no right to pass judgement on another mans experiences.

No one is denying the experience Phat, only the utterly silly explanations.

Neither you or anyone else has EVER been able to provided any evidence or reasoned argument to support the existence of any supernatural event.

Phat writes:

was imagining nothing.

Of course you were imagining that what you experienced had some supernatural cause. NOTHING in your experience or any of the other such experiences shows evidence of anything supernatural.

Your assertion that what you experienced was supernatural can ONLY come from your imagination unless you can provide evidence or reasoned argument otherwise.


My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Phat, posted 05-09-2021 3:20 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Phat, posted 05-09-2021 5:42 PM jar has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15361
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 18 of 104 (886186)
05-09-2021 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by jar
05-09-2021 4:37 PM


One does not require objective evidence before they believe or conclude.

If so, there would be zero believers.


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 05-09-2021 4:37 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 05-09-2021 5:47 PM Phat has responded
 Message 22 by AZPaul3, posted 05-09-2021 9:30 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33343
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 19 of 104 (886188)
05-09-2021 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Phat
05-09-2021 5:42 PM


Phat writes:

One does not require objective evidence before they believe or conclude.
If so, there would be zero believers.

Honest people do not claim fact without providing reasoned argument or evidence.

No one doubts you believe what you experienced was supernatural; only that such a belief must be unreasonable, illogical, irrational and unsupportable.

In other words, fantasy and the product of human imagination.

Honest people would simply place the experience in the unexplained box until there was evidence or reasoned argument to even consider assigning some cause.


My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Phat, posted 05-09-2021 5:42 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Phat, posted 05-09-2021 6:08 PM jar has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15361
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 20 of 104 (886190)
05-09-2021 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by jar
05-09-2021 5:47 PM


Science Rejects The Supernatural Pending
OK I suppose I can agree with that. If a supernatural realm were to actually exist, however...there would never be a way to prove it. And the Bible does mention such events several times. Thus it is not entirely a product of carny sideshows...though the majority of it likely is.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 05-09-2021 5:47 PM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by dwise1, posted 05-11-2021 3:43 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19061
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


(2)
Message 21 of 104 (886195)
05-09-2021 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Phat
05-09-2021 3:28 PM


Re: The Correct Term is Oppression, not Possession.
Phat writes:

No more rude than it is for you to mock my capability to judge something as real or fake.


When I mock your ability to judge something as real or fake, I have evidence.

Phat writes:

Only when I experience it first hand do I even attempt to explain it.


"Demons" is not an attempt to explain anything. It's an excuse for not bothering to look for real explanations.

Phat writes:

And just because my explanation isn't outright rejection based on known evidence makes my assessment no less valid than yours.


Sure it does. You're rejecting the evidence that explains your experiences. Rejecting evidence is always invalid.

Phat writes:

One key giveaway regarding oppression is an innate hatred of Jesus Christ...


Which I don't have. I have more respect than you do for His words as recorded in the Bible.

Phat writes:

... or disdain for His necessity.


It isn't "disdain". It's recognition that He isn't necessary. His message is beneficial, if not indispensible. He himself is no more necessary than any of the other messengers who bring the same message.

Phat writes:

An anti theist sees the very idea of God incarnate as laughable yet also a very real threat to social progress.


Any rational person sees that. Theists can be rational.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Phat, posted 05-09-2021 3:28 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5838
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 22 of 104 (886196)
05-09-2021 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Phat
05-09-2021 5:42 PM


One does not require objective evidence before they believe or conclude.

If so, there would be zero believers.

Oh, please, God, make this happen.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Phat, posted 05-09-2021 5:42 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 4606
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


(1)
Message 23 of 104 (886235)
05-11-2021 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Phat
05-09-2021 6:08 PM


Re: Science Rejects The Supernatural Pending
If a supernatural realm were to actually exist, however...there would never be a way to prove it.

That would also hold true if the supernatural does not actually exist.

Exists or doesn't exist, doesn't matter. The result is still the same.

We cannot objectively determine anything about the supernatural, not even its very existence. So we end up trying to imagine what we can about it.

Thus it is not entirely a product of carny sideshows...though the majority of it likely is.

While it does provide grist for carny sideshow mills, it's more like nerds fixating on popular media, like comic books, and arguing over them, sometimes seriously.

Somebody comes up with an idea about the supernatural, more like a guess. Then somebody else plays off of that guess with his own guesses. And it grows and spreads from there. Like a parlour game, only they take it seriously.

Sure, they'll try to make their extrapolations logical, but they're still operating within a logic system which may only make sense within that system and not in the real world.

For example, we see this process at work in the The Big Bang Theory episode where the girls try to figure out what the guys see in comic books (the guys are away at a Star Trek convention). They read Thor and get embroiled in a heated argument about who can lift Mjölnir (Thor's Hammer) and why it "works that way".


"Does the hammer decide?"
"It can't decide. It's a hammer!"
"It's a magic hammer."
"Yeah, but it can't make decisions."
"If Harry Potter's wand can make decisions, then why can't Thor's hammer?"
"OK, if you're going to compare wands and hammers, then I can't take you seriously."

Kind of sounds like some of the exchanges here.

Though as Captain America points out about putting the hammer in an elevator, "The elevator's not worthy." (Avengers: Age of Ultron - "Elevator's Not Worthy" Ending Scene - Movie CLIP HD)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Phat, posted 05-09-2021 6:08 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1214
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 24 of 104 (886311)
05-15-2021 3:39 PM


Non-Creation Christianity
I've seen it implied many times, and was directly told once (can't remember when or where) that Christians who are creationists are actually in a minority of all Christianity. Back in the "God Delusion" thread, these two comments inspired me to possibly start a new thread;

jar writes:

Also it is essential to point out that much of Christianity also totally rejects creationism and Intelligent Design so all the evidence shows that Science and Old Earth and Evolution are not atheistic but simply reality.

and;

Phat writes:

I dont know nor care too much about defending Creationism. In regards to the new generals, however, I had heard that Stephen Meyer and Jonathan Sarfati were the Literati whom were left. What flaws do the majority of you discern in these two men? And again....I don't really see why there even exists Creationism except for the profit motive in writing books.

But since it seems to fit in this thread well enough, I'll just start it here. I have no idea where it will lead.

Creationism is ORGANIZED, all Protestant denominations don't seem to take exception to it. While I don't see many of them making a big deal of it, they all preach and believe that every word of the Bible is true. Including the first 5 words; "In the beginning God created..."

Ken Ham makes a big deal of it, his elaborate website, his creation museum, his "Ark Encounter", are there for anyone who wants to see and learn more of his conservative, literal Biblical beliefs. And he has armies of other Bible scholars who collaborate with him on everything he says. There are Biblical scholars that are syndicated throughout U.S. radio and television, Charles Stanley, John McArthur, David Jerimiah, several others, all creationists as far as I know.

There have been debates in the past, the well known one between Ken Ham and Bill Nye. But Nye didn't represent non-creation Christianity, he represented atheism. Why has Ham never debated a well known non-creation Christian? Maybe because there aren't any? WHY NOT?

A much longer ago collegiate debate happened between Kenneth Miller and Henry Morris. Kenneth Miller is more of a science guy than a representative of non-creation Christianity. I'm sure Morris, like Ham, would have liked to have a discussion with one. Why haven't they? Because they don't exist?

Who are Jar and Phat's teachers? Where is the organization in non-creation Christianity? What's their go-to source to get information on just what parts of the Bible are true, and what parts are "allegories"?

If the majority of Christians are not creationists, I'd expect there to be tons of names of "SCIENTIFIC BIBLE SCHOLARS", who could answer tons of questions, since they would be halfway between atheists like Richard Dawkins, and creationists like Ken Ham. Who are they, what are some names of syndicated high profile scientific Bible scholars, that I can learn from and listen to on radio, and watch on television on Sunday mornings?

I suspect they don't exist. When Jar says, as he did once here; "Christ wasn't much of a Christian", and many other amazing things that he and Phat say, I suspect they simply come up with them themselves, with no references or organization as to where they came from. Those two certainly have their disagreements with each other, I've never seen either of them point to an authoritative source, concerning their non-creation Christianity.

If atheism has plenty of organization in science (and it does), and creationism has plenty of organization in protestant religion, (and it does) where is the organization in all this COMMON non-creation Christianity?


Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by PaulK, posted 05-15-2021 4:48 PM marc9000 has responded
 Message 26 by Tangle, posted 05-15-2021 5:07 PM marc9000 has responded
 Message 27 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 05-15-2021 5:28 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 34 by dwise1, posted 05-19-2021 6:33 PM marc9000 has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16857
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 25 of 104 (886312)
05-15-2021 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by marc9000
05-15-2021 3:39 PM


Re: Non-Creation Christianity
quote:
Creationism is ORGANIZED, all Protestant denominations don't seem to take exception to it. While I don't see many of them making a big deal of it, they all preach and believe that every word of the Bible is true. Including the first 5 words; "In the beginning God created..."

Take a look at the plaintiffs in McLean vs Arkansas. The United Methodists were the main force opposing creationism in this case. But the Episcopal Church, the African Methodist Episcopal Church and the Presbyterians were in on it, too.

Then you have the Old Earth Creationists who take the Bible less literally (while still insisting that it’s true). And the Intelligent Design crew are generally in that camp, too. Behe isn’t even a creationist.

quote:
Why has Ham never debated a well known non-creation Christian? Maybe because there aren't any? WHY NOT?

Maybe Howard Van Till, Francis Collins, Rowan Williams, Kenneth Miller, Simon Conway-Morris and the many others aren’t - or weren’t - interested in debating Ken Ham?

quote:
If the majority of Christians are not creationists, I'd expect there to be tons of names of "SCIENTIFIC BIBLE SCHOLARS", who could answer tons of questions, since they would be halfway between atheists like Richard Dawkins, and creationists like Ken Ham. Who are they, what are some names of syndicated high profile scientific Bible scholars, that I can learn from and listen to on radio, and watch on television on Sunday mornings?

Real Bible scholars aren’t “syndicated” or generally even “high profile”. I bet you’d be hard put to name one - creationist or not.

quote:
If atheism has plenty of organization in science (and it does), and creationism has plenty of organization in protestant religion, (and it does) where is the organization in all this COMMON non-creation Christianity?

If atheism has “plenty of organisation in science” I’d like to see it. Naming scientists who happen to be atheists hardly counts.

Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by marc9000, posted 05-15-2021 3:39 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by marc9000, posted 05-19-2021 5:33 PM PaulK has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8149
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.7


(2)
Message 26 of 104 (886313)
05-15-2021 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by marc9000
05-15-2021 3:39 PM


Re: Non-Creation Christianity
marc writes:

If atheism has plenty of organization in science (and it does),

There is no such thing as organised atheism. Atheism is just a lack of belief in gods. It's not an institution, it has no organisation, no funding, no structure, no nothing. Atheists are just individuals that individually don't believe what you believe. Or anyone else's other god fantasies. It's a lack, it's not a something. You're railing against a a nothing.

Atheism has nothing to do with science. Science is full of believers of all shapes and sizes. Just as a matter of numbers, science must be populated overwhelmingly by believers. Most of whom you'll disagree with; for religious reasons.

Science was created by creationists ffs. Your enemy is reality not science. It is what it is.

and creationism has plenty of organization in protestant religion, (and it does) where is the organization in all this COMMON non-creation Christianity?

Can't help you with that, it makes no sense to me.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by marc9000, posted 05-15-2021 3:39 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by marc9000, posted 05-17-2021 8:13 AM Tangle has responded

  
AnswersInGenitals
Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.4


Message 27 of 104 (886314)
05-15-2021 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by marc9000
05-15-2021 3:39 PM


Re: Non-Creation Christianity
marcMMMMMMMMM writes:

...all Protestant denominations don't seem to take exception to it...

The only possible way to parse this attempt at a sentence is that it says that not all/every protestant religions take exception to it [creationism], i.e., there may be some protestant religions that do take exception to it. Is that what you really mean?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by marc9000, posted 05-15-2021 3:39 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1214
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 28 of 104 (886364)
05-17-2021 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Tangle
05-15-2021 5:07 PM


Re: Non-Creation Christianity
There is no such thing as organised atheism. Atheism is just a lack of belief in gods. It's not an institution, it has no organisation, no funding, no structure, no nothing. Atheists are just individuals that individually don't believe what you believe. Or anyone else's other god fantasies. It's a lack, it's not a something. You're railing against a a nothing.

And we have another winner! 2 days go by, and none of these other truth seekers attempt to correct you.

Has no one here ever heard of American Atheists?

quote:
Since 1963, American Atheists has protected the absolute separation of religion from government, raised the profile of atheists and atheism in our nation’s public and political discourse, and educated Americans about atheism. Now, more than ever, we need your help.

Nooooooo!!!! There is no such thing as organized atheism!!

Freedom From Religion Foundation - Freedom From Religion Foundation

quote:
Won’t you join FFRF in our critical work to promote nontheism and defend the constitutional separation between religion and government? With more than 30,000 members, FFRF, a 501(c)(3) nonprophet nonprofit, works as an effective state/church watchdog and voice for freethought (atheism, agnosticism, skepticism).

More evidence that this place isn't about truth, it's only about shouting down regular Americans.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Tangle, posted 05-15-2021 5:07 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Tangle, posted 05-17-2021 8:52 AM marc9000 has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8149
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.7


(3)
Message 29 of 104 (886366)
05-17-2021 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by marc9000
05-17-2021 8:13 AM


Re: Non-Creation Christianity
marc writes:

Has no one here ever heard of American Atheists?

Well that was 100% predictable. There's a club for trainspotters too. People have hobbies.

Do you think that is in anyway comparable to any religious organisation - even the smallest, daftest Christian cult?

I'm an atheist. About 40% of UK people are non-religious. We have no meeting places, no spires, chants, statues, buildings, offerings, collections, smoke and bells, no policies or catechisms, no actual contact with any other atheists except randomly in the pub in a non-collective act of drinking beer.

Non-religion is NOT an organisation, it's just a non-belief. A very few of us are weird enough to populate boards like this to laugh at you crazies. We occasionally join a campaign to prevent a religiously motivated political intervention that affects us like gay marriage, contraception, abortions, euthanasia, genital mutilation, forced weddings and so on. But mostly our non-belief is irrelevant to us. So no, we are not organised, we're just people.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by marc9000, posted 05-17-2021 8:13 AM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by marc9000, posted 05-19-2021 6:17 PM Tangle has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1214
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 30 of 104 (886422)
05-19-2021 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by PaulK
05-15-2021 4:48 PM


Re: Non-Creation Christianity
Take a look at the plaintiffs in McLean vs Arkansas. The United Methodists were the main force opposing creationism in this case. But the Episcopal Church, the African Methodist Episcopal Church and the Presbyterians were in on it, too.

And all four of those denominations use the 66 book Bible, creation references and all. Why would they oppose creationism "in this case"? POLITICS is the only answer. They know how much atheism is organized, they know how big the ACLU war chest is. They preferred to avoid legal problems, and they possibly don't completely understand how much the atheism that's in today's science classes threatens the society in which they live.

Maybe Howard Van Till, Francis Collins, Rowan Williams, Kenneth Miller, Simon Conway-Morris and the many others aren’t - or weren’t - interested in debating Ken Ham?

Or maybe they're afraid to.

Real Bible scholars aren’t “syndicated” or generally even “high profile”. I bet you’d be hard put to name one - creationist or not.

I did name a few, in the last message. Charles Stanley, John McArthur, David Jerimiah - you might have recently heard of McArthur, he stood his ground against those who tried to use covid 19 to close down his church. He was ready to go to jail, but his opponents backed down, they probably realized it would help his publicity if he did.

If atheism has “plenty of organisation in science” I’d like to see it. Naming scientists who happen to be atheists hardly counts.

You'll be seeing it, before I'm done in this thread.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by PaulK, posted 05-15-2021 4:48 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by PaulK, posted 05-19-2021 5:51 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 33 by nwr, posted 05-19-2021 6:27 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021