(July 10, 2014 at 10:03 am)ManMachine Wrote:

(July 10, 2014 at 9:20 am)Blackout Wrote: Believers are angry that more and more people are becoming atheists, agnostics or deists, they can't cope to the fact religious institutions will be out of people in the future. And they get really angry when an atheist says 'you can't believe in god without committing logical fallacies' so they come with the argument of 'god is not about logic it's about belief I don't need evidence bla bla bla'

Logic is not a value system, it is only a framework on which we hang facts about our world.

Religious institutions have survived for thousands of years, it's true that they are significantly different, of that I'm sure, Christianity today is nothing like Christianity of the 5 century BCE, but they will never be 'out of people'. They will be different, but they will persist, you can bet you eyes on that.

MM

Meh, there were religious systems before Christianity that lasted for much longer and are utterly dead today. I'm more optimistic that with the huge access to unrestricted information that the internet and mass communication provides, Christianity will go the way of Ra and Thor and Zeus, or at least transform so much that it's not even recognizable as Christianity at all.

(July 10, 2014 at 9:58 am)Jenny A Wrote: I just finished The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, by Alister McGrath and Joanna Collicutt McGrath, 2007. I included the copyright date, because the McGraths make essentially all of the same arguments.

1. Dawkins doesn't understand the nounced view of most Christians. Therefore Dawkin's book is really an attack on a strawman.
2. Since he hasn't taken the time to read theology, he has no business talking with any authority about whether god exists or not.
3. Some scientists believe in god (including himself--he's a neurophysiology who went on to study theology), therefore, belief in god is rational.
4. Science is not really at odds with religion, because religion and science answer such very different questions.
5. Dawkins fails to see that religion and god are not the same thing. God exists, but religions change.
6. Dawkins has failed to account for religion. Yet religion exists. Therefore god exists. ----In other words you have a god sized hole in your head.
7. If religion is evil, so is atheism, just look at the former Soviet.
8. Jesus was very moral.
9. Properly followed, religion is very good for you.
10. Religion is making a comeback.

And the finale? Atheism is a faith.

He tells this little anecdote in the first chapter:

Quote:After [a lecture]. I was confronted by a very angry young man. The lecture had not been particularly remarkable. I had simply demonstrated, by rigorous use of scientific, historical and philosophical arguments, that Dawkins's intellectual case against God didn't stand up to critical examination. But this man was angry--in fact, I would say he was furious. Why? Because, he told me, I had "destroyed his faith." His atheism rested on the authority of Richard Dawkins, and I had totally undermined his faith. He would have to go away and rethink everything. How dare I do such a thing!

(Italics in the original)

I'm not sure I believe in this angry young man.

Atheism is a faith. As much as there is no scientific evidence to prove the existence of deities, there is none to prove the non-existence of a deities either. Taking up a position of either asserting they exist or asserting they do not exist requires a leap of faith.

As much as theists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with their god, atheists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with the lack of a god, both are factually unsubstantiated positions unless they are prepared to accept theism and atheism are both positions of faith.

The most anyone can say factually is, we do not know.

MM

(July 10, 2014 at 10:10 am)ManMachine Wrote:

(July 10, 2014 at 9:58 am)Jenny A Wrote: I just finished The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, by Alister McGrath and Joanna Collicutt McGrath, 2007. I included the copyright date, because the McGraths make essentially all of the same arguments.

1. Dawkins doesn't understand the nounced view of most Christians. Therefore Dawkin's book is really an attack on a strawman.
2. Since he hasn't taken the time to read theology, he has no business talking with any authority about whether god exists or not.
3. Some scientists believe in god (including himself--he's a neurophysiology who went on to study theology), therefore, belief in god is rational.
4. Science is not really at odds with religion, because religion and science answer such very different questions.
5. Dawkins fails to see that religion and god are not the same thing. God exists, but religions change.
6. Dawkins has failed to account for religion. Yet religion exists. Therefore god exists. ----In other words you have a god sized hole in your head.
7. If religion is evil, so is atheism, just look at the former Soviet.
8. Jesus was very moral.
9. Properly followed, religion is very good for you.
10. Religion is making a comeback.

And the finale? Atheism is a faith.

He tells this little anecdote in the first chapter:

(Italics in the original)

I'm not sure I believe in this angry young man.

Atheism is a faith. As much as there is no scientific evidence to prove the existence of deities, there is none to prove the non-existence of a deities either. Taking up a position of either asserting they exist or asserting they do not exist requires a leap of faith.

As much as theists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with their god, atheists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with the lack of a god, both are factually unsubstantiated positions unless they are prepared to accept theism and atheism are both positions of faith.

The most anyone can say factually is, we do not know.

MM

Woah, man, that's not what atheism is. An atheist is just one who doesn't accept the proposition that "God exists". It's not the same as saying "God doesn't exist". Some atheists say that, but that's not the definition of an atheist.

(July 10, 2014 at 10:06 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(July 10, 2014 at 10:03 am)ManMachine Wrote: Logic is not a value system, it is only a framework on which we hang facts about our world.

Religious institutions have survived for thousands of years, it's true that they are significantly different, of that I'm sure, Christianity today is nothing like Christianity of the 5 century BCE, but they will never be 'out of people'. They will be different, but they will persist, you can bet you eyes on that.

MM

Meh, there were religious systems before Christianity that lasted for much longer and are utterly dead today. I'm more optimistic that with the huge access to urnestricted information that the internet and mass communication provides, Christianity will go the way of Ra and Thor and Zeus, or at least transform so much that it's not even recognizable as Christianity at all.

I think you and I would both agree Judaeo/Christianity did not spring into existence out of nowhere. Probably originated in Canaanite pantheon, which itself was probably built on Babylonian or Sumerian religions, and so on back into the mists of history.

And in centuries time I'm sure Christianity will not look like it does today (assuming we survive that long as a species).

Notwithstanding, it will persist in some form.

MM

(July 10, 2014 at 10:10 am)ManMachine Wrote: Atheism is a faith. As much as there is no scientific evidence to prove the existence of deities, there is none to prove the non-existence of a deities either. Taking up a position of either asserting they exist or asserting they do not exist requires a leap of faith.

As much as theists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with their god, atheists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with the lack of a god, both are factually unsubstantiated positions unless they are prepared to accept theism and atheism are both positions of faith.

The most anyone can say factually is, we do not know.

MM

Is it a faith not to believe in unicorns? ----- Not believing in what there is no evidence for is not a faith. Should someone bring evidence that there are either unicorns or god, I will revise my opinion. It isn't a matter of faith.

(July 10, 2014 at 10:10 am)ManMachine Wrote: Atheism is a faith. As much as there is no scientific evidence to prove the existence of deities, there is none to prove the non-existence of a deities either. Taking up a position of either asserting they exist or asserting they do not exist requires a leap of faith.

As much as theists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with their god, atheists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with the lack of a god, both are factually unsubstantiated positions unless they are prepared to accept theism and atheism are both positions of faith.

The most anyone can say factually is, we do not know.

MM

No kidding. How long have you been here without being able to pick up that most of us are agnostic atheists? We don't assert there is no God, except possibly the married bachelor versions. I know it would be convenient for your position if most atheists were strong atheists, but they just aren't.

(July 10, 2014 at 10:10 am)ManMachine Wrote: Atheism is a faith...The most anyone can say factually is, we do not know.

MM

Which is what we say, and theists don't.

"I don't know if there is a god or not but currently, due to no available evidence that can convince me, I don't think there is".

"I believe in (a) god"

Two very different positions on the same question of 'is there a god?'

The thing is, even if we take it as given that 'we' owe a lot to so called Christian values, my only retort to that is 'so?'. I don't understand why it's suddenly a bad thing to be pragmatic about this; take something you believe is good and reject what is deemed bad.

I am also free to attack and ridicule religion all I want because, after all, that's my right. Religion is just a belief; an idea, and as such it deserves no special rights or privileges. If attacking a belief when it is presented to me as a fact somehow makes me 'evangelical', then I'd like a side by side comparison between the atheist and theist versions to see the disparity.

(July 10, 2014 at 10:06 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(July 10, 2014 at 10:03 am)ManMachine Wrote: Logic is not a value system, it is only a framework on which we hang facts about our world.

Religious institutions have survived for thousands of years, it's true that they are significantly different, of that I'm sure, Christianity today is nothing like Christianity of the 5 century BCE, but they will never be 'out of people'. They will be different, but they will persist, you can bet you eyes on that.

MM

Meh, there were religious systems before Christianity that lasted for much longer and are utterly dead today. I'm more optimistic that with the huge access to unrestricted information that the internet and mass communication provides, Christianity will go the way of Ra and Thor and Zeus, or at least transform so much that it's not even recognizable as Christianity at all.

Probably Christianity will fade just like Thor and Zeus followers faded, but it will take time. I can already notice younger people are becoming atheists more frequently, or at least they choose to be agnostics or deists instead of following religious dogmas.

But theism will always prevail, probably forever, I don't know

(July 10, 2014 at 6:04 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(July 10, 2014 at 5:30 am)ManMachine Wrote: There are many Christian values at the heart of contemporary Western atheism and it does not bode well that most atheists are ignorant of them.

No. There are many worthy values at the heart of contemporary western atheism.

Wait a minute. I only signed on for non-belief. We have common values?

(July 10, 2014 at 10:10 am)ManMachine Wrote: Atheism is a faith. As much as there is no scientific evidence to prove the existence of deities, there is none to prove the non-existence of a deities either. Taking up a position of either asserting they exist or asserting they do not exist requires a leap of faith.

I am getting less and less impressed with your critical thinking ability the more you post.

Atheism is simply the response to the claim made by theists that a god exists. It is not the claim that gods do not exist.

It requires zero faith to disbelieve an unsupported claim. ZERO.

Quote:As much as theists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with their god, atheists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with the lack of a god, both are factually unsubstantiated positions unless they are prepared to accept theism and atheism are both positions of faith.

Please list examples of atheists doing this.

Quote:The most anyone can say factually is, we do not know.

The vast majority of atheists do not claim to know, with absolute certainty, that a god or gods do not exist.

---

(July 10, 2014 at 5:30 am)ManMachine Wrote: There are many Christian values at the heart of contemporary Western atheism and it does not bode well that most atheists are ignorant of them.

Name one worthy value that could only come from Christianity, and could not have come, or did not come, from purely secular sources.

The famous 'golden rule' predates the Abrahmic religions by centuries.