Judging from the continuation of faulty reasoning by atheists here I will again take you guys through the logical steps that destroy the atheist philosophical paradigm.

Atheism has no philosophical paradigms.

It’s a LACK of belief in any deity.

Period.

There is not, nor has there ever been anything more to it then that.

As for these “spiritual experiences” you talk about, all the evidence points to it being nothing more then the electrochemical functions of the human brain in action. A figment of our own imagination in other words.

Now, would you mind telling us why you’re really here?

The truth please, and try to avoid the verbose word salad you’ve been using to say nothing.

arielmessenger - 17 November 2012 06:30 PM

“My point is that you can find “logic” in history by piecing together what supports your contention while excluding info that would weaken or refute it. This is a common mistake made by people, ie. pulling historical data out of context to support a claim, which is what you are doing. If anything history SUPPORTS atheism by clearly analyizing the written origins of religion from the Sumerians to Christianity’s earliest beginnings. In short we created it and their remains no evidence of the existence of the supernatural. But you can be as self delusional as you want, been there done that, tried it, no god, no fairies, no trolls, no incubus, no sucubus, lots of stories though and I do like them as they relate to history. If you’ re a real seeker you’ll find the facts work better than any truth you form through intuition.”

Judging from the continuation of faulty reasoning by atheists here I will again take you guys through the logical steps that destroy the atheist philosophical paradigm.

When I point to what I call the “logic of history” I mean by that the historical fact that human knowledge and human ability to manipulate things has progressed since the dawning of human civilization. There is a logical reason for this: knowledge accumulates since the beginning of writing and despite innovative dead zones like the Dark Ages for Europeans, even then the Muslims were excelling at new science and recovery of lost Greek knowledge while Europeans were still running around in furs not much more advanced than hunter-gatherers. My point is there is no way for atheists to try to say this particular human knowledge avenue is invalid, e.g. ancient
Sumerian mythology or that one, e.g. Christian mythology taken literally by uneducated believers because other humans still managed to innovate despite religious
dogmas that were made to protect Jewish nationalism and/or the organized Christian Church. Human knowledge increases and abilities to alter the way things are
increases over time. The historical record clearly shows this. It is the logic of history that informs the intelligent person it is pure foolish blather for any person at one
stage of human knowledge progression to make claims that they know with such certainty they can say any person who doesn’t agree with them is crazy, doesn’t know science, isn’t logical, when they themselves are the ones who have abandoned logic, the logic of history that says what human know today is never the end of knowledge acquisition for human beings, that to hold such an irrational argument against future human powers based on knowledge we as yet do not possess but that certainly does not rule out what we will know and can do with what we know in the future.

And I have even begun to cite how and where spiritual experiences are God’s way of guiding human development as it progresses in knowledge and powers. You atheists are so behind the times spiritual conscious-wise that you are addressing and attacking the fundamentalist Christian believers who are no longer the head of Christianity and haven’t been for thinking Christians for over 200 years.  I am not going to keep answering die-hard attempts to deflect or divert the point of my argument that has crushed Atheism, that argument based on the logic of history that is impossible for any rational mind to counter.
c

I agree with TimB. You are only saying that we will never have a 100% proof that there is no god. And you are illustrating that modern and maybe moderate forms of religion have adapted by “following the gaps”: propose the existence of god there where science has, or cannot give an explanation. And this you call the destruction of the atheist philosophical paradigm?

arielmessenger
Judging from the continuation of faulty reasoning by atheists here I will again take you guys through the logical steps that destroy the atheist philosophical paradigm.

And, pray tell, what is the atheist philosophical paradigm?

the logic of history that says what human know today is never the end of knowledge acquisition for human beings, that to hold such an irrational argument against future human powers based on knowledge we as yet do not possess but that certainly does not rule out what we will know and can do with what we know in the future.

And that is your proof of God?
Moreover, your implied suggestion that future human powers can make us gods actually supports the theoretical and applied sciences, not a god.
Prayer (almost) certainly won’t get you there, no matter how hard you try.

George - 15 November 2012 09:27 AM

And the meaning of people suffering from cancer is what? And I do see contradiction between theism and science. Dead people, for example, don’t become alive again, virgins don’t get pregnant, and Jewish carpenters cannot walk on water.

Cancer is a indeed horrible thing. We should do everything to find a cure. To me the meaning of people suffering from cancer is it being a trigger for progress. Like in the past, the meaning of people suffering from polio was being a trigger for progress. And this progress did happen. And life expectancy keeps rising.

I don’t see contradiction between theism and science. The first is based on beliefs for which we can never know if they are true. But we can choose to believe. The second is based on scientific method. For science death is the end. Now some interpretations of the Bible are actually misunderstandings. The Bible is full of poetry, myths and parables relying on metaphors and symbolic meaning. Educated Christians don’t believe in talking snakes. This second creation myth is about a deeper meaning. Adam and Eve are not real people. They symbolize aspects of our human origins. Likewise wasn’t God the biological father of Jesus. It was real human sperm which fertilized Maria’s egg. Again, the idea of virginity in this context has a symbolic meaning. We are talking about a very special child whose ideas inspired Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King almost 2000 years later. The same symbolic meaning applies to Jesus walking on water. Of course he didn’t in a literal sense. The depiction of his doing so is a metaphor for his powers. It was about how to remain calm during our storms of life.

The mindsets of biblical literalists remain stuck in the dark ages. When I ask them to show me a talking snake they can’t, although some might actually search for one to prove that the Bible is correct. Let me know when you find one. I’d love to listen to a talking snake.

Thevillageatheist - 15 November 2012 09:49 AM

In your explanation of the universe having an ultimate purpose, you ARE employing the god of the gaps argument by stating that the universe must have a purpose in order to exist and that this purpose was ordained by a deity of some kind, a watch maker if you will. Lacking empirical evidence, what you have left is faith in a supreme being which mirror’s Patrick’s argument. there must be some entity out there pulling the strings (pardon the pun) to create the conditions for the mega…. (you Germans have a way to slam words together!) universe. How about a third option? The universe creates it’s own purpose without any prodding. It just is and we’re part of it for a while until we become starstuff again. Meantime we’ll continue discovering the mechanics of the system and satisfy ourselves in an endless pursuit of how the whole system works.
Cap’t Jack

No, I don’t. First, I never said that the universe must have a purpose and I also didn’t say it must have a deity or watchmaker. People can choose to believe in this, which doesn’t mean their beliefs are true. That’s the nature of faith. So all I’m saying is that to me the universe has a purpose, because that’s what I believe, but I could be wrong.

A god of the gaps is about gaps. We know roughly what after the 10^-43th second of our universe’s existence which includes the formation of planet Earth. We know how organic matter can form in the primordial ocean. We also roughly know bacteria turned into fish and how fish turned into humans. What we don’t know yet is how the first RNA molecules and protein formed. That’s a gap. One could say, God did it. That would be a god of the gaps. It’s not the one I believe in. Gaps are about something happening in between. The nature of the ultimate explanation is different. It’s not about a gap. It’s about the ultimate metascientific explanation being self-referential or not.

Metascience is not about empirical evidence. That’s the realm of science. We should not confuse the realm of science with the realm of thoughts beyond science. There is a simple proof by contradiction based on first-order logic that science cannot know everything.

dansmith62 - 18 November 2012 04:41 AM

George - 15 November 2012 09:27 AM

And the meaning of people suffering from cancer is what? And I do see contradiction between theism and science. Dead people, for example, don’t become alive again, virgins don’t get pregnant, and Jewish carpenters cannot walk on water.

Cancer is a indeed horrible thing. We should do everything to find a cure. To me the meaning of people suffering from cancer is it being a trigger for progress. Like in the past, the meaning of people suffering from polio was being a trigger for progress. And this progress did happen. And life expectancy keeps rising.

I don’t see contradiction between theism and science. The first is based on beliefs for which we can never know if they are true. But we can choose to believe. The second is based on scientific method. For science death is the end. Now some interpretations of the Bible are actually misunderstandings. The Bible is full of poetry, myths and parables relying on metaphors and symbolic meaning. Educated Christians don’t believe in talking snakes. This second creation myth is about a deeper meaning. Adam and Eve are not real people. They symbolize aspects of our human origins. Likewise wasn’t God the biological father of Jesus. It was real human sperm which fertilized Maria’s egg. Again, the idea of virginity in this context has a symbolic meaning. We are talking about a very special child whose ideas inspired Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King almost 2000 years later. The same symbolic meaning applies to Jesus walking on water. Of course he didn’t in a literal sense. The depiction of his doing so is a metaphor for his powers. It was about how to remain calm during our storms of life.

The mindsets of biblical literalists remain stuck in the dark ages. When I ask them to show me a talking snake they can’t, although some might actually search for one to prove that the Bible is correct. Let me know when you find one. I’d love to listen to a talking snake.

Total bullshit.

Your stench of theism will always drift far from rationality, you aren’t fooling anyone, godboy!!!!!

mid atlantic - 18 November 2012 05:27 AM

Total bullshit.

Your stench of theism will always drift far from rationality, you aren’t fooling anyone, godboy!!!!!

MA, this is nothing more than empty invective, which is against the rules.

Since when is the word bullshit a good counter argument?

sobpatrick - 15 November 2012 02:09 PM

Personally I hope atheism doesn’t go away (I know it wont) but I do wish each atheist was lucky enough to experience at least one supernatural occurrence in their life.  Having experienced two (one with another witness) I can say first hand that it changes everything.

I also hope atheism doesn’t go away. Without atheism, Christianity would have remained stuck in a 13th century mindset full of evil witches and an angry God. One reason why modern mainstream Islam is so backward is that it cannot handle atheism. If a Muslim wants to become an atheist this might get him or her killed. If a 21st-century Christian wants to become an atheist, this might result in a few disappointed Christians. I know that atheists don’t want to hear this, but the Age of Enlightenment, humanism, atheism and the formation of secular states are all offspring of the Judeo-Christian tradition. And even though it had taken many centuries and a lot of suffering, the Catholic Church finally embraced the heliocentric model and the science of evolution. It was in fact a Catholic priest who first suggested a big bang universe. So much for one good schoolmaster being more use than 100 priests. I’d say one excellent priest is more use than 100 good schoolmasters. Mendel is another good example.

Now not all Christians think and feel the same. To me the experience of a supernatural occurrence in one’s life is symbolic description of an unusual event probably involving the vast powers of the unconscious mind.

Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 15 November 2012 04:51 PM

Atheism does not have a philosophy. It’s a blank slate. Nothing there. How hard is this for you to understand?

“Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental nature of reality, knowledge, and existence, and relates to the values, reasoning, mindset, and language of a person or society. Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.”

Why do you say that atheism and philosophy have nothing in common?

No, I don’t. First, I never said that the universe must have a purpose and I also didn’t say it must have a deity or watchmaker. People can choose to believe in this, which doesn’t mean their beliefs are true. That’s the nature of faith. So all I’m saying is that to me the universe has a purpose, because that’s what I believe, but I could be wrong.

A god of the gaps is about gaps. We know roughly what after the 10^-43th second of our universe’s existence which includes the formation of planet Earth. We know how organic matter can form in the primordial ocean. We also roughly know bacteria turned into fish and how fish turned into humans. What we don’t know yet is how the first RNA molecules and protein formed. That’s a gap. One could say, God did it. That would be a god of the gaps. It’s not the one I believe in. Gaps are about something happening in between. The nature of the ultimate explanation is different. It’s not about a gap. It’s about the ultimate metascientific explanation being self-referential or not.

But that’s the essence of your argument. You state that the universe has a purpose because that’s what you BELIEVE. Can this be scientifically proven? If no, the default position is faith. You then relate to the universe on a personal Level and are beyond empericism. So far, no scientific theory explains why it exists but it’s certainly not as has been previously thought, anthropocentric. And yes the mechanics of how life originated are known and metascience may fill in the gaps but it isn’t science, merely pieced together science and philosophy, hence belief, hence god of the gaps which is self referential and created by the brain via electrical impulses between synapsis. No need for a theistic explanation. What you’re pondering is an explanation of the unknown via a supernatural belief and that’s ok for you, believe in fairies if you like, but it isn’t science and neither is metascience.

Cap’t Jak

Thevillageatheist - 18 November 2012 06:36 AM

But that’s the essence of your argument. You state that the universe has a purpose because that’s what you BELIEVE. Can this be scientifically proven? If no, the default position is faith. You then relate to the universe on a personal Level and are beyond empericism. So far, no scientific theory explains why it exists but it’s certainly not as has been previously thought, anthropocentric. And yes the mechanics of how life originated are known and metascience may fill in the gaps but it isn’t science, merely pieced together science and philosophy, hence belief, hence god of the gaps which is self referential and created by the brain via electrical impulses between synapsis. No need for a theistic explanation. What you’re pondering is an explanation of the unknown via a supernatural belief and that’s ok for you, believe in fairies if you like, but it isn’t science and neither is metascience.
Cap’t Jak

Yes, such beliefs are beyond empericism. We should use science for what it was designed to “build and organize knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe”. Do you agree that there are limitations to what science can tell us?

Yes, such beliefs are beyond empericism. We should use science for what it was designed to “build and organize knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe”. Do you agree that there are limitations to what science can tell us?

Absolutely, any scientist will tell you that. There are many phenomena out there that have no explanation as yet. But like the Higgs-Bosun particle, we begin with speculation, then hypothesis, then on to theory. This as you know this is a slow and laborious process but it’s now never ending. Will science eventually solve every mystery? stay tuned as we used to say in the 60’s but it has a very good track record so far don’t you think?

Cap’t Jack

dansmith62 - 18 November 2012 04:41 AM

George - 15 November 2012 09:27 AM

And the meaning of people suffering from cancer is what? And I do see contradiction between theism and science. Dead people, for example, don’t become alive again, virgins don’t get pregnant, and Jewish carpenters cannot walk on water.

Cancer is a indeed horrible thing. We should do everything to find a cure. To me the meaning of people suffering from cancer is it being a trigger for progress. Like in the past, the meaning of people suffering from polio was being a trigger for progress. And this progress did happen. And life expectancy keeps rising.

I don’t see contradiction between theism and science. The first is based on beliefs for which we can never know if they are true. But we can choose to believe. The second is based on scientific method. For science death is the end. Now some interpretations of the Bible are actually misunderstandings. The Bible is full of poetry, myths and parables relying on metaphors and symbolic meaning. Educated Christians don’t believe in talking snakes. This second creation myth is about a deeper meaning. Adam and Eve are not real people. They symbolize aspects of our human origins. Likewise wasn’t God the biological father of Jesus. It was real human sperm which fertilized Maria’s egg. Again, the idea of virginity in this context has a symbolic meaning. We are talking about a very special child whose ideas inspired Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King almost 2000 years later. The same symbolic meaning applies to Jesus walking on water. Of course he didn’t in a literal sense. The depiction of his doing so is a metaphor for his powers. It was about how to remain calm during our storms of life.

The mindsets of biblical literalists remain stuck in the dark ages. When I ask them to show me a talking snake they can’t, although some might actually search for one to prove that the Bible is correct. Let me know when you find one. I’d love to listen to a talking snake.

So the snake is not real but God is? Why? How do you know God is not just another metaphor for, I dunno, the laws of physics? Also, you said you were a theist, not a deist, so I am wondering what kind of role your God plays in your daily life. He is not just sitting in the clouds, eating popcorn and watching kids to die, is he?

Thevillageatheist - 18 November 2012 07:00 AM

Yes, such beliefs are beyond empericism. We should use science for what it was designed to “build and organize knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe”. Do you agree that there are limitations to what science can tell us?

Absolutely, any scientist will tell you that. There are many phenomena out there that have no explanation as yet. But like the Higgs-Bosun particle, we begin with speculation, then hypothesis, then on to theory. This as you know this is a slow and laborious process but it’s now never ending. Will science eventually solve every mystery? stay tuned as we used to say in the 60’s but it has a very good track record so far don’t you think?

 

Cap’t Jack

There are many phenomena out there that have no explanation as yet.

It’s amazing how atheist egos can recognize the historical record of accumulated knowledge when it suits them but when I use to debunk their ideology somehow
accumulated human knowledge no longer matters if it contains the historical pattern that debunks the atheist paradigm that there is no God, no spiritual
reality, and science can explain everything right now, no need to wait for further developments, the atheist mind knows all, right now. Where, oh God, are the minds of
these people?

Eventually, atheists will duck their demise by sliding silently into the agnostic philosophy where they should have stayed in the first place, if they wanted to be what they think they are, objective observers of the natural world. Can’t be that when you’ve already made up your mind.

I think my in-your-face style which comes with the Jewish Christian prophesy bearing job description has rattled some of you and you atheists are actually more p.o.‘d with me because a theist has bested you guys in logic and you weren’t expecting that, especially logic applied to spiritual phenomena being another of the invisible forces that effect the physical that human beings will eventually find ways to measure. In short, I didn’t even have to talk about the reality of God in order to simply point out atheism’s fatal flaw, its Achilles Heel, the rushing to judgment without adequate information. Human science knowledge at the year 1812 could not explain the physics of many phenomena and human science knowledge of spiritual forces at 2012 can in no way be taken as the final say in the matter.
What is known is the logic of history.

I make the case that God is using religions to guide human moral development which essentially means getting control over one’s emotions so that fear and rage do not rule or ruin the interactions between peoples. As a former atheist I can fully agree that when you look at the historical record of Abrahamic religions it’s easy to come away with the conclusion that these religious guys are a godawful terror to humanity whenever they get their hands on the reigns of the kingdom. People die when Abrahamic religionists rule so where is any moral progress in that? Well, you have to judge by the moral factor that is inherent within the religious teachings in order to see the long term benefit. Case in point. Christianity. Jesus Christ’s teachings and supreme act of self-sacrifice for love of others has in itself created a universal and sustained Model of Humanity, this is a story about how God rejoins humanity in the flesh and by doing so rejoins humanity with God. As a Humanitarian Model Jesus Christ excels inspiring more humanitarians such as Gandhi, MLK, Ang San Su Kyi. which shows how universal Christ’s teachings are.

Now if you judge Christianity on its historical record you might as well toss Jesus Christ’s teachings out the window. Paul did. He made the teachings of secondary importance, far more important was using Christ as a magic Name and Get-Out-of-Hell card for escaping the otherwise sinful doom of the natural man. But Paul’s lasting
ruination of Christianity was his terrible commandment telling Christians that they must obey their governments or face condemnation in Hell. 180 degree turn from Jesus’ utter rebellion against government authority in service to God. Paul’s commandment is why Pauline Christians in action have been a nightmare for non-Christians and fellow Christians. These guys will do anything their leaders tell them to do, from Constantin to George W. Bush. Lucky Romney didn’t get in. Pauline Christians are a danger to the world now, just like Zionist Jews and radical Muslims. Here’s a deal, Atheists.

I’m a Gnostic Christian. If you study our history, deeply, you will find there’s reason to believe Christianity itself began as a Gnostic Jewish theology. Certainly Pauline Christianity had no use for us Gnostics seeing how we didn’t go for the whole Church organization business to establish a new Gentile copycat of Jewish priesthoods. Gnostics were the very first victims of Christian persecution so we know what it feels like to have your minority worldview be considered a danger to society. We both agree Abrahamic religionists pose a continuing worldwide threat to world peace. We both know as minorities within Abrahamic majority populations our voices are not heard and religious warfare continues unabated. So. Why not do what political organizers do? Get a uniting ideology and organize minorities into a politically powerful Voice. A Voice against Abrahamic religious warfare.

A united Voice can stop the Abrahamics who are out of control again, a new Christian Crusade happening in the Middle East and the expected Muslim reaction with the Holy Land a powder keg, isn’t it always? Let’s do something! I propose Armageddon!

Really. Only an Armageddon that returns to that Canaanite word’s original meaning, the heavenly Realm high above the hill of the Divine Assembly where God Most High ruled with wisdom and compassion, not force and fear as does God Most High’s Son, Yahweh, all dolled up by priests of Judah and remade into YHWH, a total schizoid mess of a god with EL Elyon’s wisdom and compassion here and Yahweh, the Israelite tribal war god’s cruelty and stupidity there. To this Gnostic, Jesus Christ was the fall guy for Yahweh, his namesake, who under the thumb of ambitious priests of Judah’s YHWH who does a Lucifer number on EL Elyon at the Sinai Covenant where EL is subsumed into Yahweh to create I AM/YHWH, another man-made god. Giving you a little history of the Gnostic-Pauline Christian theological split over the acceptance of Yahweh, Yaldaboath, the Blind One, as the Most High God. That split was only the beginning and Gnosticism was driven out of the Roman Empire and almost lost to history. So we Gnostics really have no reason to protect Abrahamic phonies using God for cover for their nefarious territorial conquest ambitions. I propose we expose the real roots of Abrahamic religions in a united Voice of all people, Abrahamics too, who are fed up with these goddamn religious wars that never end. If you include all the Eastern religions, animists, spiritual-but-not-religious, atheists, agnostics, that’s a lot of people and a Voice can be created that can be heard by these Abrahamics out of control.

A worldwide public event to advertise our cause which is what you guys do best: expose the lies, contradictions, and bad ideas contained in the Abrahamic religions Scriptures. But here’s additional information that like I did with atheism, hits the Achilles Heel of Abrahamic religions, all of them, the historical theory becoming fact that has been building up virtually unnoticed for over 2000 years, the theory-very likely fact that Abraham is actually a Jewish remake of Brahma as Sarah is a Jewish makeover of Sarasvati, Brahma’s consort. Hagar, the handmaiden of Sarah is the makeover of the main tributary river the Ghaggar to the Sarasvati river in the northern India region which spawned the Vedic civilization and Brahminism. Geological history shows the Sarasvati River drying up forcing the Brahmin community out of northern India and south into India proper and westward, into Iran which adopted Suriyah, a Brahman sun god and spread Suriyah into the Middle East, Assyria, Syria, Asher, and Asir, which in Greek is Osiris. There was a well established incense and spice trade route with Hindu Brahmin merchants dealing with Hebrews in Yemen, then known as Sheba, Sabeans, which is derived from Shiva. Brahministic ideas entered into the Hebrew priesthood before the Torah-Tanakh books were written. What I’m trying to squeeze down into a few sentences is that Judaism, the core of the Abrahamic religions is highly vulnerable to historical exposure as another cobbled together out of various other religions religion itself and its mythology of Abraham can be exposed as a historical Fraud. If Abe goes down, they’ll All go down because “Abrahamic” religions, without Abraham as foundation of “righteousness” (ha-ha, just serve your son up on the barbie, Klaus..God’s says so even if he’s got his fingers crossed behind his back and is “just kidding”..really a good guy god..) Sorry, we Gnostics are no friends of Yahweh, the Fraud of Israel.

Ok, here’s a Scenario:

We Mass together, A MILLION AT MEGIDDO on December 25th, 2012. I know it’s coming up rather soon, but for world peace, isn’t any effort worth the sacrifice?
I await your enthusiastic response.