Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Atheism & the Creation Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 17:14 |
Atheism rejects the existance of "God" or "theism".
However, my question is, are Atheists today being hypocrites.
Its scientifically accepted that the universe was "created", there was once nothing which means there had to be come power in the beginning.
The basic concept of religion is the idea of creation, if we ignore the other details, basically there is a creating power from which everything was created.
However, Atheists still remain Atheists, has it therefore become a religion and more a matter of "faith".
The science points to there being a creation, Athiests reject the idea of creation yet claim to be supporters of science.
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
Lmprs
Arch Duke
Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 17:55 |
You are funny as usual.
Originally posted by Bulldog
Its scientifically accepted that the universe was "created" |
Excuse me? What are you smoking?
Originally posted by Bulldog
there was once nothing |
There was never 'nothing'. Nothing is just that, nothing. Got it?
The universe started from a tremendously dense and hot state, and has been expanding ever since.
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 18:07 |
There was initially nothing, from nothing there was a force which created the universe.
However you wish to put it, there was a creating power.
Well at the end of the day, with all our modern science there are still two alternatives, there is a God or there isn't, if you claim their isn't you'll have to proove it, for those that believe they have faith.
You can only be right or wrong, laughing at somebody who believes is as silly as thinking somebody who doesn't believe is rational. From a scientific viewpoint, its actually hypocritical.
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
Lmprs
Arch Duke
Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 18:18 |
Originally posted by Bulldog
There was initially nothing, from nothing there was a force which created the universe. |
You can believe whatever you want, but this statement has absolutely no scientific basis.
Originally posted by Bulldog
with all our modern science there are still two alternatives, there is a God or there isn't |
Sorry, medieval age is over. Modern science never deals with metaphysical concepts like god, soul etc.
Originally posted by Bulldog
...laughing at somebody who believes is as silly as thinking somebody who doesn't believe is rational. From a scientific viewpoint, its actually hypocritical. |
I'm always amused by religion - motivated attempts to hjack science.
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 18:30 |
Explain reiki to me, I have seen it performed on my father, it is clearly metaphysical and REAL.
Science and religion are different. Religion is about faith, science is about fact - simple really. there is no need to prove faith with fact.
Though all of that aside, i think this thread is pointless since I have no opinion of others' faith (or lack thereof).
Edited by Zagros - 09-Aug-2007 at 18:33
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 18:52 |
Originally posted by Zagros
Explain reiki to me, I have seen it performed on my father, it is clearly metaphysical and REAL.
Science and religion are different. Religion is about faith, science is about fact - simple really. there is no need to prove faith with fact.
Though all of that aside, i think this thread is pointless since I have no opinion of others' faith (or lack thereof). |
Personally I'd say science is more about theory than fact. Such as the theory, the placebo effect, explains why reiki works.
|
|
|
Lmprs
Arch Duke
Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 18:58 |
Originally posted by Paul
Such as the theory, the placebo effect, explains why reiki works. |
The very existence, or at least nature of placebo effect is disputed.
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 21:39 |
By whom? Scientists or Mystics?
Edited by Paul - 09-Aug-2007 at 21:39
|
|
|
Maharbbal
Sultan
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 22:24 |
Originally posted by Bulldog
Well at the end of the day, with all our modern science there are still two alternatives, there is a God or there isn't, if you claim their isn't you'll have to proove it, for those that believe they have faith.
You can only be right or wrong, laughing at somebody who believes is as silly as thinking somebody who doesn't believe is rational. From a scientific viewpoint, its actually hypocritical.
|
You are forgetting a few points: the main difference between science and religion is not toward what is known but toward what is yet unknown and unthinkable. The strength of religion is to refuse to ever say "I don't know", but to asses "God doesn't want me to know". To questions such as where the universe comes from, where is it expending to, what puts life in what wasn't alive science answers "I don't know but I hope one day someone will find out". Religion thrives where science is unsure. The main argument against the reality of the corpus of beliefs shouldering the institutionalised religions is whatever you do can be explained. Many times a myth has been traced back to some petty event or a lie turned into an archetype (the bandt turned king David). History is also a very good observatory to realize how precisely historical religions are while they should be for ever. Only because the men are short sighted religion can thrive. Thirty centuries ago an Egyptian could have asked you "what proof do you have that the god with the head of a hawk and the goddess that welcomes the dead in the other world are un-real". Yet these gods are dead now. Realizing that christianity was once only one of the numerous little cults thriving in Judea after the Roman conquest is an excellent way to see religion in a more relative way. And this goes for all of them and all their myths. Every single of these myth is related to some physical or psychological cause. Short meditations such as prayers have proved to be excellent for your heath. And the religions' emphasis on family, the ban over murder and the respect of the superiors are the basics of life in society previously guarantied by the taboos. Some religious obligations are plain stupid but most are over all useful or used to be useful (the ban over pig meat in the desert). Faith triggers something in hour brain and I'm not far from believing that we evolved to be religious. That brings us back to your initial point: laughing at a believer is stupid not because he is right but because that is just proving he is human. For centuries religions have provided people with hope to cling at, social norms and a sense of identity. Religion is a short cut in the human mind (faster to say "God forbids" than "considering A, B and C despite D I think you should not do E, but it is up to you to decide"). Now the question is: do we still need that many short cuts if at all?
|
I am a free donkey!
|
|
Lmprs
Arch Duke
Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 22:35 |
Originally posted by Paul
By whom? Scientists or Mystics? |
Wouldn't mystics cease to be mystics if they accept the fact that their ways have no use at all?
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 02:10 |
No. Mysticts become Scientists when they figure out how it works. Like AlChemists becoming Chemists. Its really just a matter of dropping the definite article
Originally posted by Paul
Such as the theory, the placebo effect, explains why reiki works. |
reiki works on animals
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 02:37 |
Originally posted by Paul
Originally posted by Zagros
Explain reiki to me, I have seen it performed on my father, it is clearly metaphysical and REAL.
Science and religion are different. Religion is about faith, science is about fact - simple really. there is no need to prove faith with fact.
Though all of that aside, i think this thread is pointless since I have no opinion of others' faith (or lack thereof). |
Personally I'd say science is more about theory than fact. Such as the theory, the placebo effect, explains why reiki works. |
How can feeling an external energy, as hot as a radiator coming from teh hands of another, be considered a placebo effect? Not just that the reiki practitioner can also sense weak spots, areas of pain/disease in the body and the energy they emit has a healing effect.
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 10:12 |
Originally posted by Bulldog
There was initially nothing, from nothing there was a force which created the universe. |
If you are talking about big bang theory than it proposes that there were no time. Thus there was no any "prior"
|
.
|
|
AyKurt
Shogun
Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Scotland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 236
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 15:42 |
The deists can argue that if the universe was created from the Big Bang then something must be responsible for making the Big Bang. That nothing comes from nothing.
The theists can argue pretty much the same but carry it on by concluding that since nothin comes from nothing then the big bang is a theory thats wrong and only creation as stated in their religion must be true.
Atheists can argue that if the universe was created by god then who created god. That nothing can come from nothing.
All have a point. So whats hypocritical?
Oh and yes Reiki works. It worked on my neice when she was only 2. She never knew what Reiki was nor what it could do so it couldnt be the placebo effect.
|
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 20:07 |
In ancient writings the idea of God is the state of
nonexistence, from there arose a general consensus - life came from non-life,
existence from non-existence. The Hindu texts began to be compiled about 1500
years before Christ. The early "Creation Hymn" (Rig Veda X 129)
concludes: "Whence this universe came, whether it was created or
uncreated, only He who dwells in the highest Heaven, He alone knows it, or
perhaps He doesn't know either."
This passage is popular among educated Hindus of today as a
candid answer about existence from their ancient body of knowledge. In the Rig
Veda VIII, 100.3, the priest, referring to Indra, the most powerful, muses;
"Chant unto Indra, if indeed he exists. One says to another: Indra does
not exist, who has seen him, hence whom do we praise?"
The object of worship was not a Supreme Being, they looked
for an order in life that flows through the universe to all. As their religion
sought to find realities more questions arose. The writings are not smooth and
continuous because many answers arose in the quest for universal
truth. The passage of time came to represent a cycle of cosmic events that eternally
repeats in the growth, decay, and renewal of the universe. This infinite cycle
of the ages is briefly reflected on earth with the finite cycles of the year.
Man progresses through his many empires going through stages of growth, decay
and then renewal in thousand year cycles.
A thousand years later the Buddha became a member of a
philosophical movement still searching for ultimate reality for they hadn't found it. The Vedic system
had gone into a decline having lost its initial practicality and a multitude of
sects endlessly argued. Buddha searched and while sitting under a tree, the message which
changed history came to him.
Buddhists neither confirm nor deny a creator. Their way of
life strives for peace through cleansing of thought and action from desire. A
materialistic way of life alone can never be satisfactory. Whether people believe
in a deity or not they can work towards "enlightenment". Buddha
challenged the widespread belief in Brahma, the God said to be responsible for
the creation of the universe. He explained to the Brahmans that Brahma may be a
possibility; other gods existed only in speculation. "Among lesser people
it is agreed that gods exist."
Dharma. (Sanskrit) The universal laws of nature that sustain
the operations of the universe, therefore the manifestations of all things. It
has reference to the code of conduct for the individual soul, which produces
virtue, morality, or religious merit.
Abhasana or Abhasa. (Sanskrit) Shining forth. The process
that takes place as the One becomes the many.
Abhava. (Sanskrit) Non-being, non-existance. A means by
which correct knowledge is measured (from nothing).
Mahat. (Sanskrit) Great principle. The cosmic intelligence.
|
elenos
|
|