yet they did not know everything, and that is why they could believe in a god.
Athiests
- Thread starter Enigma'07
- Start date
not quite, if i knew everything, i wouldn't believe in god.
Some of these people most likely believed in god because they were raised to do so and even though they pushed the bounds of science, they could not push the bounds of conscience. Look at Einstein, perhaps the most famous of the lot, he refused to allow certain things in his views of relativity on the grounds that god does not play dice with the universe. He stubbornly held to emotional beliefs and was eventually superseded in his own field.
Some of the others most likely believed in god because they had to. Galileo, not in your list, was tortured by the church for attempting to say the earth revolved around the sun. Well, that and making fun of the pope. These people could go so far and no further. Their emotional ties to their culture prevented from admitting the truth to themselves.
And anyway, what god did they believe in? Did they all believe in the god of the bible? Was it their own personal translation of that god they believed in? Did they incorporate their own ideas into god, making him more than he was previously? Is that heresy?
We are humans and live in a human society. It has only been very recently that professing a nonbelief in god does not have dire consequences. It may not last that long either. I still say that the church will one day return to it's brutality of old.
Brandon432003
Registered Senior Member
Athiest (sup.)- The fullest extent of athi; most athi. "Dude, I thought I was athi until I met you....but you're hardcore; you're the athiest!"
Atheist (n.)- one who lacks the belief in God. "My cousin used to believe in God, but now he's an atheist."
Atheist (n.)- one who lacks the belief in God. "My cousin used to believe in God, but now he's an atheist."
Last edited:
invert_nexus said:By the way, how could one describe the methods by which proof could be established in any less than a long-winded diatribe? The fallacy inherent in your statement is almost as great as the fallacy you try to impose upon your creator by confining it's glory into a simple book of man. Shame, shame, shame. And who's calling who self-righteous? I don't remember saying that you'll go to hell unless you believe as I do.
It's not a simple book simpleton. "Shame, shame, shame."
Saying "you'll go to hell unless you believe I do" is also an inaccurate statement. That purports the notion that "I" am the source of the belief or that I am of any important ultimately. You should at least get your "facts" straight.
Esp. "confining" glory into a simple book of man. By definition, God can't be defined so I don't know whether you were trying to be funny or what but sure, go ahead..
More churches than the Roman Catholic has commited brutality. The Salem witch trials weren't catholic. Shunning is a form of violence (IMO), it's not catholic. Violence is inherent in the suppression of heresy. How can you suppress heresy without violence? Ignore it? Not much suppression going on there. We live in a stage of life where suppression of heresy is at a minimum. But it will return. And all religions will join in the fun once they are able. The liberal religions of today will falter and fail when the suppression begins. If they won't act as strongly as their competitors then they will fail. The only choice is to suppress heresy just as fiercely.
Actually, all the major monotheistic religions. Multitheistic religions aren't as inherently aggressive against those who believe differently. All things fit under the wings of the pantheon.
but if i knew everything i would know that god doesn't exist instead of just believing so.
But, if you knew everything, would you share the knowledge?
We're living the punishment every day. God simply provided a way back to Him. Besides, if you truly believe the only person who can decide what is right or wrong is himself, then how do you explain local courts, regional courts, high courts, international courts, war crime tribunals...?Lemming3k said:
Enigma'07 said:
Newton wore a wig because that was the fashion at the time. He didn't wear a wig for some scientific reason. Newton believed in god because that was the fashion at the time too. Same goes for the rest (with or without headgear)
Modern scientists however, are mostly atheists. I used to work with a bunch of astronomers, and out of the 70 of them, I think there were just three that believed in god.
But anyway, would a clever scientist believing in god add to god's credibility? Is god going to wear a t-shirt saying 'I exist because Einstein has faith in me."?
To answer your original question, why are people atheists. Well, everybody is an atheist. If you believe in one god, you don't believe in the rest. Therefore, you are an atheist for not believing in Zeus, Pan, Loki or Ganesh.
I'm an atheist (complete, I don't have faith in any god), because I don't see any proof of there being any god(s). Also, I don't think I've ever met a religious officiary that has seemed honest, and I've met so many religious people that have the same flaws as atheists, to know that faith doesn't actually make people better people.
Add the fact that the church is corrupt tax dodging organisation, and often attempts to make it's own petty rules apply to non-believers through changes in law, I have utter contempt for organised religion, and those that practice it.
You might be, i feel pretty great, if believing in god means you feel this life is punishment then i pity you, you should be enjoying what you have, its a gift.
They were all originally set up in conjuction with religion, why do you think you must swear on the bible to tell the truth? They were set up to punish the heretics and sinners, original laws in many places were adapted from the bible.
There goes the argument that God would not allow "all this suffering". I have to presume you are only thinking about yourself here. As for myself, I have been blessed with great friends, wonderful family, lots of love, and green hills to play in...
Does that mean you're an anarchist?