Why do Atheists Bother?

[posthuman]

I think you mean 'naturalism' or 'materialism'. 'Humanism' is a different kettle of fish.

there's a lot of overlap =p

don't you agree tho that people say "evolution" to refer to all three of those?

maybe that last thing i posted explains better

 

[posthuman]

Kettle of fish, do i need worms or just drop a hook?

try a shotgun

 

[Kerry]

i'd put it like this:
evolution is a mechanism that explains how biodiversity arises. within species it's well documented - dog breeding, for example. across species and across phyla etc. the evidence becomes more and more circumstantial, 'hand-waving' and speculative. that's neither here nor there.
evolution isn't an origin story. it has nothing to say about where life came from or if God's hand guides nature or not. it has nothing to say about whether or not things are created. just how they are, now that they exist, and how they change over time.

religious philosophies like secular humanism on the other hand have their own theories of origin - ex nihlio and ex forte - out of nothing and by chance - and use a much broader, speculative 'theory' of evolution than what can be demonstrated by science to support their origin story and atheistic worldview. that's not part of what a biologist would call "evolution" at all.

so technically speaking - which is an important way for a scientist or philosopher to speak - evolution itself isn't a religion. humanism is.
humanists will say 'o it's not it's a philosophy' -- well, by it mankind declares himself tantamount to god. by that measure buddhism isn't a religion either, nor is christianity. it is another philosophy, and a relationship with the living God, respectively.

Creation by evolution only opens you to the lie. There is in science adaptive strategy but is a far cry from evolution. I meant if you lived on grapes and found yourself in a place that did not have grapes but only wheat you would adapt to eating the kernels of wheat grain.

 

[Tintin]

i'd put it like this:
evolution is a mechanism that explains how biodiversity arises. within species it's well documented - dog breeding, for example. across species and across phyla etc. the evidence becomes more and more circumstantial, 'hand-waving' and speculative. that's neither here nor there.
evolution isn't an origin story. it has nothing to say about where life came from or if God's hand guides nature or not. it has nothing to say about whether or not things are created. just how they are, now that they exist, and how they change over time.

religious philosophies like secular humanism on the other hand have their own theories of origin - ex nihlio and ex forte - out of nothing and by chance - and use a much broader, speculative 'theory' of evolution than what can be demonstrated by science to support their origin story and atheistic worldview. that's not part of what a biologist would call "evolution" at all.

so technically speaking - which is an important way for a scientist or philosopher to speak - evolution itself isn't a religion. humanism is.
humanists will say 'o it's not it's a philosophy' -- well, by it mankind declares himself tantamount to god. by that measure buddhism isn't a religion either, nor is christianity. it is another philosophy, and a relationship with the living God, respectively.

Speciation and natural selection are actually terms that have been hijacked by the evolutionary agenda (both those belong to the theistic and non). They are actually remarkable pieces of evidence for a biblical understanding of creation. No evolution necessary.

 

[Kerry]

which is why the good ole USofA is spending billions to go to Mars in search of life. Talk about deception. People are hurting and we see fit to spend my tax dollars on a hopeless search. all in an attempt to disprove God. think it will happen, just a waste of my money.

 

[JoshJoseph2]

Many atheists expend a HUGE amount of energy fighting against someone they claim is imaginary.

I don't waste any time fighting imaginary people.
Do you?

Extraordinarily odd isn't it?

I think the reason why Atheists expand so much energy on Christianity is because it effects society as a whole. (unlike things like santa and such). A gay Atheist may expend a lot of energy on Christianity because it is the main thing preventing them to marry (if they are in USA).

 

[Kerry]

I think the reason why Atheists expand so much energy on Christianity is because it effects society as a whole. (unlike things like santa and such). A gay Atheist may expend a lot of energy on Christianity because it is the main thing preventing them to marry (if they are in USA).

Atheist hate the bible because it offends them as they are their own God. The bible tells that there is a God that we will be accountable to and atheist hate that notion. So they come up with with half truths to justify being there own God.

They even have an agenda to change the bible starting back in in the 1960's so be careful of new translations.
read this disturbing speech from the 60's

New Order of Barbarians

 

[nl]

It is silly to say evolution is a religion. It clearly is not.

"You who are on the road must have a code that you can live by". - from song "Teach Your Children" by Graham Nash of CSNY circa 1970 or earlier

Lyric Source: CROSBY, STILLS, NASH & YOUNG LYRICS - Teach Your Children

People do live and evaluate decisions according to a "code" or set of values that they live by. It would be chaos if people evaluated each decision without a beginning set of values to shape the way that they initially filter and analyze information.

Based upon your own set of semantics and definitions, some would call that code their "religion". Religion can be defined broadly or narrowly. Some definitions that are more narrow would say that religion includes a belief in God. Some definitions of religion that are more broad would say something like religion is a code that you live by.

Many say the etymology of religion lies with the Latin word "religare", which means “to tie, to bind.”

Many societies and organizations as well as many individuals have a "code" that they live by that binds them. IMHO, that "code" may or may not include a theistic element.

 

[Kerry]

"You who are on the road must have a code that you can live by". - from song "Teach Your Children" by Graham Nash of CSNY circa 1970 or earlier

Lyric Source: CROSBY, STILLS, NASH & YOUNG LYRICS - Teach Your Children

People do live and evaluate decisions according to a "code" or set of values that they live by. It would be chaos if people evaluated each decision without a beginning set of values to shape the way that they initially filter and analyze information.

Based upon your own set of semantics and definitions, some would call that code their "religion". Religion can be defined broadly or narrowly. Some definitions that are more narrow would say that religion includes a belief in God. Some definitions of religion that are more broad would say something like religion is a code that you live by.

Many say the etymology of religion lies with the Latin word "religare", which means “to tie, to bind.”

Many societies and organizations as well as many individuals have a "code" that they live by that binds them. IMHO, that "code" may or may not include a theistic element.

You are beating a dead horse as he is his own God and will defend it to the bone. Just as Satan has deceived. He will teach it to his children and wonder why the are divorced and have children that there fathers will not raise. But that's evolution so it okay and scientific.

 

[Kerry]

in fact the good ole US of A will spend billions to to mars to find some algae growing on a rock to disprove God. when people are starving and can't find jobs. But this is of utmost importance

 

[Cycel]

Please, evolution is taught as truth across the board (even though it's an adult fairytale, actual fairy-tales contain more truth) and atheists kick up a stink about indoctrination?

Need I point out that one is an established scientific theory while the other is a Bronze Age creation account?

 

[Cycel]

in fact the good ole US of A will spend billions to to mars to find some algae growing on a rock to disprove God.

Do you believe that the discovery of life on Mars, even simple bacteria or algae, would discount your view of God?

 

[john832]

Nothing odd about not wanting this stuff taught in schools
Or not wanting religious people impacting how countries are run.

I don't want the fanciful farce of evolution taught in schools, but somehow that seems to be fightin' words with atheists.

 

[john832]

Do you believe that the discovery of life on Mars, even simple bacteria or algae, would discount your view of God?

No. But I'll wait until they DO discover life outside of the confines of good ole earth before I even worry about it.

 

[john832]

Need I point out that one is an established scientific theory while the other is a Bronze Age creation account?

Look up the hollow earth theory sometime. It is an established scientific THEORY also.

 

[kaylagrl]

Need I point out that one is an established scientific theory while the other is a Bronze Age creation account?

Its a theory, thats all.There are huge gaps and problems but no one wants to admit circular dating and on on.Even things that have been proven wrong they kept teaching as fact for years.It is very much a religion.

 

[Tintin]

Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age - they're all relative ages as there is quite the cross-over at times. Also, if the creation account is true, it was written at the very beginning of the Stone Age, not during the Bronze Age (I'm not taking into account the evolutionary timescale).

 

[nl]

Need I point out that one is an established scientific theory while the other is a Bronze Age creation account?

The theory of evolution lacks an explanation for how extensive structure and genetic information was developed in a single-celled creature like the amoeba. Theory seems to lack an explanation for abiogenesis (life from non-life) and for the sudden proliferation of life found in the fossil record in what has been described as "The Cambrian Explosion".

Even the "Bronze Age" could have the advantage of a rich and accurate oral tradition even if people today can't seem to keep a story straight. Many reject it but there is even the possibility of "Divine Revelation". The writings of Homer (dates estimated widely at between 850-1270 BC) were said to depend much upon oral tradition.

Evolution as a philosophy governs much and easily assumes that new thought is better than old thought. But, old can be true. Unchanging truth can actually be quite old. New thought is not always better than old thought. New products (think "New Brand-Name Cola") are not always better than old products.

 

[kaylagrl]

What gets me with the evolution crowd is how they talk about global warming and how the poor polar bears will die.The horror of it!! Well if you believe in evolution the bear will grow fins and they'll be just fine.What happened to survival of the fittest? The old cartoon use to have a man standing with a sign saying "the end is near!!" and he was a Christian.Now its the evolutionists with the sign "the end is near"!! If we evolved from apes we can evolve into something else cant we? How come humans stopped evolving? How come apes arent walking out of the zoo and taking the bus to work? I wonder....

 

[Tintin]

What gets me with the evolution crowd is how they talk about global warming and how the poor polar bears will die.The horror of it!! Well if you believe in evolution the bear will grow fins and they'll be just fine.What happened to survival of the fittest? The old cartoon use to have a man standing with a sign saying "the end is near!!" and he was a Christian.Now its the evolutionists with the sign "the end is near"!! If we evolved from apes we can evolve into something else cant we? How come humans stopped evolving? How come apes arent walking out of the zoo and taking the bus to work? I wonder....

Some of your examples aren't helping our cause. Still, there are no transitional fossils in the fossil records. Those fossils that had been considered in the past turned out to be either hoaxes, lies or misinterpretations.