Heads up advice for atheists.

[Brian37]

Having debated online for 13 years on a daily basis you start seeing a pattern from apologists no matter what religion they are trying to defend.

While it can be fun to tear apart their books, there are plenty of apologists from all religions that have learned to try to shoehorn their end goal by masking it.

I have heard the same arguments from Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and just yesterday my first Rastafarian. More and more believers know they cannot simply point to their religion, so they start out by pretending they are not selling anything.

So a huge red flag to look for is when a theist starts an argument by attacking science. The slick insidious crap does not fool sane people who accept science as universal. But it can work on laypersons and even newbie atheists.

There is no Catholic theory of evolution. There is no Allah theory of gravity. There is no Hindu thermodynamics. There is no Buddhist physics. There is no Rastafarian cause for the big bang(yes that was a real argument some nutfuck made yesterday). There are simply humans who make shit up and do not want to accept our finite existence.

So when you see an argument start off with "science doesn't know everything", there is a salesman behind it trying to distract you from their end goal that they are ultimately trying to sell you their club and their superstition.

No, science does not claim to know everything. But it also requires confirmed data as the starting input. It also does not gap fill like religion does.

To my theist friends, yes I am being blunt. No this is not about your rights, but your ability to demonstrate the credibility of your claims. So if you think you have something, fine, make whatever claim you want, but until you get it confirmed in a lab, and universally confirmed beyond your own personal bias, do not expect others to swallow it blindly.

[polar bear]

Well put. Good words for a newbie!

The fact that science doesn't need to fill in the gaps and only exists to prove or disprove theories is why I started questioning religion in general!

Thank You!

[WinterHold]

Well, I always wanted to test this verse against science (probably most Muslims wanted to) :

( 33 ) O people from jinn and mankind, if you are able to pass beyond the regions of the heavens and the earth, then pass. You will not pass except by power (literal translation of the word سلطان).
( 34 ) So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny?
( 35 ) There will be sent upon you Fragments (the literal translation of شواظ) of fire & brass and you will not succeed.

So for an ancient Muslim, he/she must be wondering : am I really really going to get hit by tiny hot fragments if I got into outer space without the proper power -the sultan literally means "ultimate power/authority + control over something"..

Well we could've saved scientists some extra time by showing them this verse ; it would've guided them immediately to MICROMETEOROIDS !! with are actually fragments so hot (just like a mixture of fire & brass/copper) that kills you if you travel outer space without enough "sultan/power" !!!

I like your topic..

[Aoi Magi]

Without 'protection' no 'power' will help against micrometeoroids.

[Mudhammam]

Well put. Good words for a newbie!

[Brian37]

Well put. Good words for a newbie!

The fact that science doesn't need to fill in the gaps and only exists to prove or disprove theories is why I started questioning religion in general!

Thank You!

My aim is to please, your aim will help.

[WinterHold]

Without 'protection' no 'power' will help against micrometeoroids.

If that wasn't a sarcastic pointer to something I don't like to discuss,then I would say you didn't understand the verses correctly..

Arabic words have lots of meanings..Sultan for example is a word that usually represents an Arab man sitting on a throne. But it also means somebody has authority over somebody (and power).

[Brian37]

That is the unfortunate thing about humans, we are so wrapped up in thinking our clubs and politics and religions are unique we don't understand the evolutionary reality that our species perceptions are notoriously flawed.

Arguing that a religion was the first or original would be like Coke vs Pepsi and Coke claiming it was the first beverage because it has a red can, missing the point that both came about because of prior influence.

I was an atheist before 01 when I finally sought out other atheists online, and prior I was not that well educated in my position. I started to actively doubt my belief when a co worker asked me "What if Jesus was just a man". But even with that I did not call myself an atheist, and went from Catholic to deist.

The biggest linchpin in my journey to calling myself "atheist" was a visit to the Smithsonian Museum in DC. It still took me a couple years after to call myself an atheist, but looking back, what I saw caused me to say "If they can mix, then it all can be influenced"

The exhibit was of the Buddhist Complex of Ankor Wat in Cambodia. The Dynasty started in the 3rd century, if memory serves me correctly, and lasted about 1,000 years until. It consisted of sandstone statues of Buddha. But about halfway through that dynasty Hindus found their way there, and by the end of that hall in the Smithsonian it was clear that the Buddhist statues incorporated Hindu features. That is when I connected the dots with all religions. That was the light bulb that caused me to think "If mixing can happen with this, then humans have always created new religions by taking on attributes of others around them."

There really is nothing new under the sun. Humans make up gods and religions because of our flawed perceptions and far too often gap fill where answers lack.

[Aoi Magi]

Without 'protection' no 'power' will help against micrometeoroids.

If that wasn't a sarcastic pointer to something I don't like to discuss,then I would say you didn't understand the verses correctly..

Arabic words have lots of meanings..Sultan for example is a word that usually represents an Arab man sitting on a throne. But it also means somebody has authority over somebody (and power).

That is the thing with these texts, they are open to interpretations thus giving the same piece different meanings. Some interpretations coupled with some imagination can seem to somewhat agree to a particular scientific fact, however that doesn't mean the whole thing is scientific. This is one of the reasons why religion is such a pain. Bible for example, being the infallible and absolutely unfalsifiable word of god, manged to get itself a couple thousand different interpretations leading to a couple thousand christian denominations.


I sometimes think the one-world-language would actually be a very good idea.

[Minimalist]

Well put, Brian.

Of course the reply will come back "But.....but....but....je...je....je....jesus!"