Definition of Atheism

Just had to let you all know im still alive and thought i should stir the pot a bit again.


ATHEISM

The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for NO reason, creating everything and then everything magically rearranged itself for NO reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.

Makes perfect sense.

 

Stephen Roberts: I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

 

Well said

 

Not only the existence of this quote but especially its abundant popularity among atheists is simply additional evidence that the average atheist is compelled more by ill-thought slogans and rhetoric than consistent rationality and critical thinking.

I do fault any atheist that embraces this quote while passing himself off as a rational and critical thinker, because this quote simply does not hold up under scrutiny. It is delightful rhetoric as far as it goes, but rhetoric never goes very far in the intellectual arena. When we attempt to apply this proposition to the real world, it soon falls apart.

“I contend that we are both atheists; I simply believe in one god fewer than you.” Although this first clause of the proposition per se is nearly acceptable, it nevertheless possesses a minor but obvious difficulty. The one making this statement is an atheist who rejects all gods, and the one to whom he is speaking rejects all gods but one. Please note: How can the latter be referred to as an atheist when he affirms a belief in one God? To affirm a belief in God contradicts the basic definition of ‘atheist’. A commitment to sound reason necessitates that this first clause be deemed erroneous and nonsensical for contending that “we are both atheists” when the one to whom it is speaking affirms a belief in at least one God—the person to whom it is speaking is a ‘theist’, not an ‘atheist’.

“When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” This is embarrassingly false. In reality, when it is understood why I dismiss all other gods, the error of this clause is starkly evident. For example, one reason why I dismiss the god of pantheism as illegitimate is because, by the pantheist’s own admission, his god is none other than the world in which we live. The god of pantheism is nothing more than ‘nature’, which is an entirely appropriate and suitable term already; to replace the term ‘nature’ with the term ‘god’ is superfluous and obfuscating outside the scope of sentimentality. Now, will Stephen claim that he rejects the God of Christianity because God is nothing more than ‘nature’? I surely hope not, for by that he would commit the straw man fallacy.

But this clause is false on an even larger scale. Why do I reject all other possible gods? Because the Scriptures declare that “there is one God,” that “besides [him] there is no god,” that all other gods “by nature are not gods,” and so forth. My commitment to the truth of Scriptures is ultimately my reason for rejecting all other possible gods. I think we can be quite certain that this is not Stephen’s reason for rejecting the God of Christianity. When one understands the reason why I dismiss all other possible gods, we do not thereby find Stephen’s reason for rejecting the God of Christianity after all. Both clauses of this proposition are, in reality, nonsense and false.

 

1. When you cut and paste material from some other source, please cite the source, as an honest person would.

2. The Scriptures are demonstrably false. At the very least, they contain numerous verifiably false statements.

3. Although Christians say they believe in one God, they actually believe in three separate and distinct beings: God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. After all, 3 cannot equal 1, to those who live in the world of reality. T

 

i take it you believe in these gods too. their scriptures testify to their existence. if no why not. if you dismiss any one of these gods you are an atheist in their eyes:

It seems to me like there are an awful lot a Christians out there that seem absolutely positive that Jesus is, of course, unique and the first of his kind. They are unaware that the myth of their Christ is similar to several other god-men myths. Here are some of those other mythical god-men that Jesus, the Christian Messiah, apparently shares roots with. Does anything about these Gods that predate the christian God sound familiar? Think about these the next time you read the bible and ask yourself why do Gods that predate christianity have the same attributes as biblegod.
Of course the answer is very clear if you open your mind to the truth. Christianity is a mismash of earlier religions that borrowed its myths from earlier gods. Here is a list of some earlier gods. Does anything sound familiar:
Zoroaster/Zarathustra
--Zoroaster was born of a virgin and “immaculate conception by a ray of divine reason.”
--He was baptized in a river.
--In his youth he astounded wise men with his wisdom.
--He was tempted in the wilderness by the devil.
--He began his ministry at age 30.
--Zoroaster baptized with water, fire and “holy wind.”
--He cast out demons and restored the sight to a blind man.
--------------------------------------------
Mithra of Persia

--Mithra was born of a virgin on December 25 in a cave, and his birth was attended by shepherds bearing gifts.
--He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
--He had 12 companions or disciples.
--Mithra’s followers were promised immortality.
--He performed miracles
------------------------------
Attis of Phrygia

--Attis was born on December 25 of the Virgin Nana.
--He was considered the savior who was slain for the salvation of mankind.
--His body as bread was eaten by his worshippers
--His priests were “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven.”
--He was both the Divine Son and the Father.
--On “Black Friday,” he was crucified on a tree, from which his holy blood ran down to redeem the earth.
--------------------------------------------

Dionysus/Bacchus

Dionysus was born of a virgin on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger.
--He was a traveling teacher who performed miracles.
--He “rode in a triumphal procession on an a##.”
--He was a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification.
--Dionysus rose from the dead on March 25.
--He was the God of the Vine, and turned water into wine.
--He was called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.”
--He was considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.”
--He was identified with the Ram or Lamb.
--His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” intimates he was hung on a tree or crucified.
----------------------------------------
Horus/Osiris of Egypt


In the Egyptian myth, Horus and his once-and-future Father, Osiris, are frequently interchangeable, as in “I and my Father are one.” Concerning Osiris, Walker says:

Of all savior-gods worshiped at the beginning of the Christian era, Osiris may have contributed
more details to the evolving Christ figure than any other. Already very old in Egypt, Osiris was
identified with nearly every other Egyptian god and was on the way to absorbing them all. He
had well over 200 divine names. He was called the Lord of Lords, King of Kings, God of Gods.
He was the Resurrection and the Life, the Good Shepherd, Eternity and Everlastingness, the god
who “made men and women to be born again.” Budge says, “From first to last, Osiris was to the
Egyptians the god-man who suffered, an died, and rose again, and reigned eternally in heaven.
------------------------------------------------
Osiris’s “son” or renewed incarnation, Horus, shares the following in common with Jesus:

--Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Merion December 25 in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
--His earthly father was named “Seb” (“Joseph”).
--He was of royal descent.
--At at 12, he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was baptized having disappeared for 18 years.
--Horus was baptized in the river Eridanus or Iarutana (Jordan) by “Anup the Baptizer” (“John the Baptist”), who was decapitated.
--He had 12 desciples, two of who were his “witnesses” and were named “Anup” and “Aan” (the two “Johns”).
--He performed miracles, exorcised demons and raised El-Azarus (“El-Osiris”), from the dead.
--Horus walked on water.
--His personal epithet was “Iusa,” the “ever-becoming son” of “Ptah,” the “Father.” He was thus called “Holy Child.”
--He delivered a “Sermon on the Mount” and his followers recounted the “Sayings of Iusa.”
--Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
--He was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, and resurrected.
--He was also the “Way, the Truth, the Light,” “Messiah,” “God’s Anointed Son,” “the “Son of Man,” the “Good Shepherd,” the “Lamb of God,” the “Word made flesh,” the “Word of Truth,” etc.
--He was “the Fisher” and was associated with the Fish (“Ichthys”), Lamb and Lion.
--He came to fulfill the Law.
--Horus was called “the KRST,” or “Anointed One.”
--Like Jesus, “Horus was supposed to reign one thousand years.”
-------------------------------------------
Krishna of India

The similarities between the Christian character and the Indian messiah Krishna number in the hundreds, particularly when the early Christian texts now considered apocrypha are factored in. It should be noted that a common earlier English spelling of Krishna was “Christna,” which reveals its relation to “Christ.” Also, in Bengali, Krishna is reputedly “Christos,” which is the same as the Greek for “Christ” and which the soldiers of Alexander the Great called Krishna. It should be further noted that, as with Jesus, Buddha and Osiris, many people have believed and continue to believe in a historical Krishna. The following is a partial list of the correspondences between Jesus and Krishna:
--Krishna was born of the Virgin Devaki (“Divine One”) on December 25.
--His earthly father was a carpenter, who was off in the city paying tax while Krishna was born.
--His birth was signaled by a star in the east and attended by angels and shepherds, at which time he was presented with spices.
--The heavenly hosts danced and sang at his birth.
--He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
--Krishna was anointed on the head with oil by a woman whom he healed.
--He is depicted as having his foot on the head of a serpent.

 

" After all, 3 cannot equal 1..."

Hmmm...

Is H2O equal to ice, steam, and water in a liquid state?

One thing that can appear in 3 states...

...and water is just one simple molecule, and God who is unlimited cannot appear as 3 things?

Seems your thinking is a bit narrow...

 

athesism: i don't believe in ghosts? i don't NEED them THEREFORE I don't believe in them ..what else is there to say..

LIVIN LARGE HERE BABE!! till i ain't

every day above ground is a good day!

 

I assume you are trying to make an attempt at ridiculing a subject that you are not well read on........always a mistake!

Setting aside your defecient omniscience (e.g., knowing that all christians believe in the doctrine of the trinity as you have described it), allow me to clarify the doctrine for you, and then maybe you can debate the subject in a more informed manner:

" ....The doctrine of G-D's three-in-oneness gives the answer to the question about the subject of the revelation attested in Holy Scripture. This answer may be summarised by saying that the revelation attested in Holy Scripture is the revelation of the G-D who, as the Lord, is the Father from whom it proceeds, the Son who fulfils it objectively (for us), and the Holy Spirit who fulfils it subjectively (in us). He is the One G-D in each of these modes of being and action, which are quite distinct and never to be identified with each other.........."

Karl Barth, "Church Dogmatics, I.2, T&T Clark Ltd., 1956"

Allow me to make an even easier example for you:

Let us say that a person has a daughter.
That daughter grows up and marries.
The daughter then gets pregnant and has a son.

This woman has three distinct functions:
She is a daughter
She is a wife
She is a mother

All of these functions emanate from the same person, but each function is a distinct act, not interchangeable with each other.

The role of "daughter" cannot (or should not in our human morals) be also the role of "wife" to her father.
The role of "mother" cannot be as mother of her husband.
The role of "wife" cannot be as wife to her son.
Each "function" has a defined role where that "function" operates, and cannot operate as that function elsewhere.

If we name this woman of my example Debra, then it would be a logical statement that Debra is one person who acts in three seperate and distinct roles (e.g., Daughter, Wife and Mother), but yet is Debra.

 

Is a single molecule of H2O equal to ice, steam, and water all at the same time?

Obviously not.

Nice try, but no cigar.

If there is only one God, how did the one God send Jesus to earth to die for humanity's sins?

How can one send oneself someplace and yet remain at the original place?

Did God send a personality (i.e. that would presuppose a God with multiple personality disorder)?

Did God send an android, or a stunt double? That would be cool--I always liked the Fall Guy!

If I am so narrow, then broaden me.

Truth is, the concept of the Trinity does not appear in the Bible at all (the concept is implied, not stated). Early Christians struggled with this. At Nicea, the politically more powerful trinitarians were able to squash other groups that had a hard time accepting the divinity of Jesus and, hence, the Trinity.











God sent God.