I hope everyone had a great year as we start another. In reflection, I was amazed how much in denial that Atheists were about many subjects that dealt with God. I have learned a great deal about the Atheistic mindset since I started this blog.I also found it fascinating that Atheists cannot even bring themselves to say anything that relates to Jesus. It appears to infuriate them. In these past years, some have blasphemed His name, call Him derogatory names instead of being respectful by calling Him Jesus, God, Yahweh, Elohim, Yahshua, or Yeshua bar Yosef, for these are fighting words for the Atheists apparently.
They even had to rename our dating system for themselves to fit their worldview and now attempts to disguise it and use CE (Common Era) and BCE (before Common Era) instead of what it always has been, BC (before Christ) and AD or Anno Domini (Latin for "In the year of our Lord").
So when you were celebrating this New year we all understand that you were really celebrating, another year in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ!
Deny it all you want, find some intellectually palatable means to disguise something, but denial is just that.
I believe it was Steven Weinberg who said, in a interview with Jonathan Miller, that "there is a mystery" in life, "why that theory and not another?" That, as scientists, "we are permanently in a tragic position of not being able to fully understand the reasons of things being the way they are." Dr. Weinberg believes that there is no necessary conflict with science and religion since he knows many scientists that are believers of God.
He did say, poetically I might add, "Science didn't make religion impossible, but it made irreligious possible." I would say the same for evolution.
Dr. Weinberg said "I don't like God" of the Bible. From his vantage point God is a "terrible Character". Right after 9/11/01 he said religion by force is very dangerous and religions with that worldview are the dangerous ones, like radical Islamic believers. He also said that "most physicists cannot call themselves practicing Atheists" for that reason.
He said "As a scientist I care about searching for truth and the theory of the world. Christianity provides an alternative theory of the world. Now that, I have something to say about, I can interact with, I can respond to. On the other hand, if someone just doesn't want to eat pork or kill cows (like Hinduism), or whatever it is, then more power to them, it has nothing to do with me, there is no argument there."
I believe that is why we, as fundamentalist Atheists and Christians, enjoy discussing these things with each other. Because we cannot do anything without a theory. There is no discussion without them. That is why these liberal Christians are not as enjoyable to have a conversations with, because they believe in anything that comes along without standing on a theory.
Speaking of liberal Christians, Dr. Henry Morris said "Perhaps the more sad commentary is that only Christian scholars compromise their position on the creation of the world. The evolutionists and atheists do not."
So as we go into a new decade of Debunking Atheists, keep in mind that the Atheists are not the same as science. Science is attempting to figure out the theory of the world, Atheists are attempting to push their own worldview, agenda, or as I say religion.
bit.ly/2010AD
No doubt you will have no trouble telling us what year Jesus was born then, right?
ReplyDeleteDan:
ReplyDeleteThey even had to rename our dating system for themselves to fit their worldview and now attempts to disguise it and use CE (Common Era) and BCE (before Common Era) instead of what it always has been, BC (before Christ) and AD or Anno Domini (Latin for "In the year of our Lord").
More ignorance and scape-goating from you, Dan. Learn a bit more, will you?
Dan
So as we go into a new decade of Debunking Atheists, keep in mind that the Atheists are not the same as science. Science is attempting to figure out the theory of the world,
Science is the method by which we attempt to explain what we observe around us.
Atheists are attempting to push their own worldview, agenda, or as I say religion.
A lot of bullshit in just that one sentence. Let's see: It's THEISTS not atheists that are trying to "push their own worldview" onto others. You people are the ones with the churches, ministries, street preachers, radio and television programs all pushing your religion, trying to get "intelligent design" taught in schools, which definitely has a religious motive:
The Wedge Document states in its “Five Year Strategic Plan Summary” that the IDM’s goal is to replace science as currently practiced with “theistic and Christian science.” [transcript reference]. As posited in the Wedge Document, the IDM’s “Governing Goals” are to “defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural, and political legacies” and “to replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God.” Id. at 4. The CSRC expressly announces, in the Wedge Document, a program of Christian apologetics to promote ID.
Atheists are, for the most part, just sick of constantly being put down by you people, so now we're finally coming out and saying that it's OK not to believe in obvious fairy tales.
We're also asking you people to back up what you say.
As to your idiotic assertion that athiesm is a religion, that got shot down in the very blog post where you first asserted it!
Some more of your goofiness that got shot down.
We're learning more about your mentality than anything on this blog. For instance, there's the fact that I caught you out lying about what I said in a previous post of yours.
I have something to say about Jesus: I don't understand the appeal of Jesus as a "personality," and I don't care to strike up a "relationship" with him.
ReplyDeleteReynold,
ReplyDeleteWell done. Dan lives in a world where the paradigm is that the bible is some innerent divine document so he must use every irrational rhetorical device to defend it.
It then becomes painfully obvious that he stretches the paradigm over even the most reasoned and logical statements to skew them to try to produce doubt.
I haven't once seen it work for him. He's got no one fooled but himself.
Haha, I was going to say more or less the same thing as BathTub ;)
ReplyDeleteI would add: how come is Jesus' birth december 25th but each year of his era starts a few days after?
>>how come is Jesus' birth december 25th but each year of his era starts a few days after?
ReplyDeleteWhoever said that Jesus was born December 25th? Not in the Bible. Sounds like a secular holiday to me.
You can tell if it is from God by the fruit. Lying to children and masses of people killing each other for mere merchandise is not of God.
What a huge mistake to associate Jesus with that very secular holiday. Yet another huge mistake made by that very false, and very man made, religion.
It's not secular, it's downright pagan.
ReplyDeleteAnd the bible is quite clear on not celebrating pagan festivals and such.
>>It's not secular, it's downright pagan.
ReplyDeleteI stand corrected, I agree.
>>And the bible is quite clear on not celebrating pagan festivals and such.
Yup, I agree again. People probably think I am Un-American because I will not lie to my kids about Santa and will not participate in that, or any for that matter, Holiday.
Oh ya, I forgot about your particular kind of beliefs Dan, sorry, but at least it means that we agree on one thing, Christmas was a pagan holiday and it is now secular, i.e. we celebrate for whatever reason we want and give gifts to people we love because we love them and it's just a good opportunity to do so. No need to go into wasteful spendings either of course...
ReplyDeleteI'm just glad I now know Christianity didn't adopt any of its ideas from other religions. Unlike that silly Atheicistic religion.
ReplyDeleteIt the inerrant word so certainly didn't have a bunch of people revise and agree on what should be in it. Unlike the Evilutionist dating system.
Dan- a bit off topic, but I'm curious: why does this post feature a painting by Breugel, a Flemish renaissance painter, with the legend "medieval manuscripts" in Portuguese?
ReplyDelete>>why does this post feature a painting by Breugel, a Flemish renaissance painter, with the legend "medieval manuscripts" in Portuguese?
ReplyDeleteFunny Patty asked the same thing.
I just thought it was appropriate since it depicted a battle scene between two sides, like Christians and Atheists and "Anno Domini" was the key subject after all.
Things that make you go "hmmm" said C+C Music Factory.
Dan: if you're curious, the painting is titled "The Triumph of Death" and does not depict a battle between Christians and Atheists, but a battle of the living against Death, which can have only one outcome.
ReplyDeleteJesus was an ATHIEST. someone with such evolved morals would not believe in GOD. If you can't bet them join them and change from the inside
ReplyDeleteYou say:
ReplyDeleteAtheism is not a religion or a worldview or adenda nor science.
Atheism- can be either the rejection of theism,[1] or the position that deities do not exist.[2] In the broadest sense, it is the absence of belief in the existence of deities.
Atheist use science as a tool to obstain from ingnorance.
"They even had to rename our dating system for themselves to fit their worldview and now attempts to disguise it and use CE (Common Era) and BCE (before Common Era) instead of what it always has been, BC (before Christ) and AD or Anno Domini (Latin for "In the year of our Lord")."
ReplyDeleteOh, my. I take issue with the "what it has always been" remark. AC (ante christum) and AD (anno domini) split began in, by the system, 525.
The term BC is quite modern, by comparison. You may wish to note that the English language behind "before Christ" did not exist at the time.
At least one good thing came out of this BC/AD vs. BCE/CE debate, Reynold: Conservapedia.
ReplyDeleteAndy Schlafly was appalled. He was teaching a history class to home-schooled teens and one student had just turned in an assignment that dated events as "BCE," before the common era -- rather than "BC," before Christ.
"Where did that come from?" he demanded.
Her answer: "Wikipedia."
At that, Schlafly knew he had to act. In his mind, the popular online encyclopedia -- written and edited by self-appointed experts worldwide -- was riddled with liberal bias. Dating events without referring to the New Testament was just one example. How about Wikipedia's entry on golfer Zach Johnson, winner of the 2007 Masters? Not a single word about how Johnson gave credit for his win to Jesus Christ.
Thus was born Conservapedia.com -- labeled "a conservative encyclopedia you can trust."
My excuse for being late to this party is that I only discovered "Debunking Atheists" today.
ReplyDeleteAs to the snotty remark calling your assertion that "atheism is a religion", well, yes it is. Legally as well as in effect (a world view, intellectually bankrupt as it is).
The 7th Circuit Court: "Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being."
Just like the dishonestly named "Secular Humanism" (atheism in disguise) is also defined as a religion by the US Supreme Court: "The First Amendment was never intended to insulate our public institutions from any mention of God, the Bible or religion. When such insulation occurs, another religion, such as secular humanism, is effectively established."
I'm amazed that some of these rocket surgeons are not honest enough to admit that their anti-theism is actually a religion. Most atheists I have known are intellectually dishonest, but some are willing to make such an assertion.
Stormbringer,
ReplyDeleteAtheism can be called a religious viewpoint, given that most humans are raised in a religious paradigm, whether through community or their parents.
However, we disagree on whether atheism must necessarily be called a religion.
Citing the US court system to argue that it is strikes me as rather silly. Those are definitions in a specific, legal framework—and, by the way, courts tend to contradict each other on religion rather frequently.
I'd rather go to, I don't know, the common idiom. The vernacular. The best way I know of getting at that is, I should suggest, a dictionary. Here's an online one.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion
Under the first definition, you might well argue that atheism is a religion. However, given that lack of belief in a defined, knowable deity is simply that, a lack of belief in something, and makes no assertions about the cause or purpose of the universe, I'd argue that such a use is a bit sketchy. You're free to disagree.
None of the other definitions fit.
Unless, of course, you count the sacrament of eating babies. ;)
And, by the way, rocket surgery is nothing next to brain engineering, and I excel at neither.
I was using the legal cases as support. My biggest crime is implying, "Come on, atheism is a world view. Be honest about it."
ReplyDeleteI don't know of many atheists who would deny that atheism is a part of their worldview. Part of a worldview, yes; but a component of a worldview does not a religion make.
ReplyDeletePart of my worldview includes a belief that Santa Claus is a fictional character whose purported existence is perpetuated in part to coerce children into good behavior.
...but that's just part of it, just like a belief that human religions are inherently flawed is part of my worldview. A part, not a dogmatic whole.
I do, on the other hand, believe in love, duckies, and the beautiful potential of music and theater, but none of those assertions of belief are religions. They're components of a larger set of ideas, beliefs, and methods of understanding.
Mmm, delicious weltanschauung.