What gave it away? My pointing out that you were incorrect?So you don't believe any of the list?
Seriously? Are you that ignorant of the facts?So, spill the beans.
How about fixed Earth?
Flat Earth?
Geocentric solar system?
For starters.
What gave it away? My pointing out that you were incorrect?So you don't believe any of the list?
Seriously? Are you that ignorant of the facts?So, spill the beans.
1. Prayer doesn't work in rigorously designed studies.
2. Bad things happen to good people.
3. Creationism is false.
4. Religious people aren't any more good than non-religious people.
5. Religious texts are self-contradictory.
6. Religious texts show evidence of being written and rewritten by many authors, in contrast to their mythological origins.
7. No evidence for miracles.
8. No evidence thattexts contain knowledge that could not have been known at the time they were written. religious
9. Religious texts promote immoral behavior.
10. The universe is not fine-tuned for life.
Just ten I could think of at the moment.
?What gave it away? My pointing out that you were incorrect
Seriously? Are you that ignorant of the facts?
How about fixed Earth?
Flat Earth?
Geocentric solar system?
For starters.
And you're wrong again.Actually i think you do believe that list.
You just don't want to.
I see. Or rather I don't.I'm talking about religion.
And you're wrong again.
The bible is nothing to do with religion? At all?
Religion (of one sort or another) hasn't ever used the bible as a source of "facts" (in fact the ONLY source - they claimed)? More ignorance on your part.
And that's because...?Nope. You're wrong.
Um, wrong. The bible is the basis of religion (for one particular branch of religion at least - Christianity).There is some religion in it.
Again, the bible is not based on science it's based on belief and "the word of god".They've also used science as a source of facts.
So do the Boy Scouts, the Republican Party, and General Motors.doreen said:The atheist organizations do have a set of beliefs. They are organized. They get together around these beliefs. They have specific practices. And you can add in that some of these beliefs are not based on empirical research.
Why not? The alternative is accepting unreality, false assertions, self-contradiction, and so forth, in one's ethical systems and sets of values.doreen said:Ethics and values cannot be evidence based.
"They" - the ideological - are not "atheism". They do not all have the same or even similar ideology, merely by being atheist. And ideologies are not religions - not even the ones people are trying to spread and establish. We have two words for two different phenomena.doreen said:Ideological should not even raise an eyebrow, or? Note: this clearly means they are not simply people who lack a belief. A proselytizing ideological organization.
I could rest with that as a compromise.
They do not.jan said:But they all basically describe God in the same way.
There is none.jan said:7. No evidence for miracles.
”
Eyewitness evidence?
Not found in them.jan said:. No evidence thattexts contain knowledge that could not have been known at the time they were written. religious
”
You mean like the expansion of the universe?
The scarcity of life almost everywhere we look for it, the difficulty of living in most of the universe, the struggle of life to maintain itself in any but small and temporary corners of the universe, the lack of favorable circumstances that is the overwhelming environment of the universe we know.jan said:10. The universe is not fine-tuned for life.
”
What is your evidence for this?
1. It shows there is no evidence for prayer working at this time.
3. That means creation (of life) can better be explained through a non-intelligent evolutionary process.
4. Belief doesn't make people good, so that undermines the moral superiority claims of religion.
5. The concept of God depends on the truth of his word as represented in religious texts. If they are self-contradictory, that shows the origin is not in God, but in fallible men.
6. No they don't, many of them are different in significant ways (ways which make people act badly towards each other).
7. Anedotal evidence is not reliable. Mass hysteria is possible.
8. Nothing specific enough to show real knowledge.
. BS. The bible says to kill your children if they blaspheme or disrespect
you. It says to kill the disabled.
[/QUOTE]
And that's because...?
Um, wrong. The bible is the basis of religion (for one particular branch of religion at least - Christianity).
Again, the bible is not based on science it's based on belief and "the word of god".
No religious text written prior to 1900 has an expanding universe in it.jan said:Expanding universe sounds pretty specific to me.
Spontaneous cancers in children are not the result of bad actions.jan said:Bad reactions are a consequence of bad actions.
Not being favourable with God.
Unnecessary. Existential cannot be proved "false", anyway.jan said:Even if you are correct (which you're not), how does this prove GOD false?
Proof of that kind is for math.jan said:Doesn't prove prayer doesn't work.
The source is not credible.jan said:It is reliable if the source is credible.
Atheist is really a religion
“ Originally Posted by iHaveNoIdea
Atheist is really a religion
Technically being an Atheist is a religion right?