Atheism V's Theism.

How is what I said "propaganda"? Care to elaborate?

It's the Christians who specialise in propaganda.

 

Hmm.. I personally suggest you to obtain a better attitude, why criticising every one while you don't do anything to intrigue us with useful and interesting threads, which we can attain more useful and helpful information. I don't agree with your say, that this topic is useless and that Sean M. is clueless. Sean tries to intrigue us, and to let us release some philosophically thoughts; who we are, and why we are here. Nice job Sean M.

(ON-TOPIC): I think that the Atheism is not even a religion; it seems for me as elopement and desertion of the religiously commitment. I don't think that being Atheist is the right choise for the humanity. But I am respectful to the Atheism; even if I disagree with its deduction. And about the existence of God, as I said before, and as I will say in the future too... The humanity can't prove the existence of God, and it doesn't matter what we will do. We can't prove something that we can't have a connection with. But, it's logically obvious, that we will believe in something spiritual, something that approximated to our spirits, something that will maintain our souls, something that will help us and our confidence. I believe in the existence of God, even if I can't prove it. But, I've to mention, that spiritualism can prove the existence of God, but not to the pessimistic cultures.

 

Care to itemize the propaganda that has been thrown into the arena by Christians? Give a detailed list, omitting none, and post links to said postings.

 

E.g. that we know who wrote the Gospels, and that the New Testament accounts are historical. Posts? Look around you..

 

Go to one of my countless threads in the science forum where I've already explained many of these things.

 

Because it is in lock step with atheist propoganda and teaching ... and it conflicts with actual academia on the subject. What you say is repeatedly like a broken record of unthinking atheists who literally make the same points, and studiously ignore the rebuttals - just as you do.

Atheists seem to have surpassed the teacher when it comes to propoganda. Even in our wildest dreams would we find it difficult to convince the masses to adopt a course that conflicted with both logic and evidence ... but atheists do so in mass.

 

How do atheists' claims conflict with logic and evidence?

There is a serious lack of evidence for the gods people believe in, and indeed positive evidence against them, since reality according to modern scientific discoveries and thinking tends to disagree with the old theistic claims. It simply isn't the world of the Bible or the Koran anymore..

 

You are not presenting any evidence. That should be your first clue as to how it conflicts. Atheism does not produce evidence, it avoids it (no evidence for God?), and denies.

That is fundamentally illogical - but it challenges your faith ... so be it.

What did you expect to find in a debate forum? Blind adherence to your dogma?

 

Now that you have itemized such items, where is your PROOF that such items are 'propaganda'?

 

By that logic, it would be kind of unfair to say that Jesus performing bona fide miracles was impossible,no matter how rare of an occurrence,huh ?

 

That is self-evident, I feel. The claims are both unsupported and biased toward a certain religious view.

You can't take supernatural claims at face value and expect to be taken seriously by other people.

 

""All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree.
Albert Einstein

Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish.
Albert Einstein""

Tell that to Einstein.

 

""All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree.
Albert Einstein

Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish.
Albert Einstein""

Tell that to Einstein.

 

I don't have a dogma. I'm speaking out against dogma. The evidence for what I say is all around you. Evolution speaks against theism, because it attacks many fundamental assumptions of theistic beliefs, namely divine creation and stewardship of the Earth and its life. The nature of the universe speaks very strongly against the old theistic claims in like fashion, because those claims assumed a flat Earth with a dome sky containing the heavenly bodies, and these were purported to be claims either spoken directly by Middle Eastern gods or "inspired" by them.

Then there is the evidence of astrological meaning behind the Gospel, which, in light of similar myths from the same times and region, leads one easily to the conclusion that the Gospel is yet another myth of that type, describing not a real man but allegorising the sun in its trek through the zodiac. As my sig line currently reads, In the days when there was no knowledge of the past, writers fabricated legends to explain where they came from. ... They were ancient myths that grew into monstrous lies. That comes from the link also found there: http://www.usbible.com/Sin/Adam_and_Eve.htm

Evidence and reason conspire to dethrone gods, angels, demons and other such myths. If people didn't have an ingrained emotional need for such beliefs, they would easily die out as the unfounded, silly claims that they are.

 

Einstein was not a theist.

 

Yeah, whenever someone brought up a quote making Einstein out as if he was he'd go, "What a bunch of (*)(*)(*)(*)ing idiots." Might be paraphrasing a little.

 

Actually he was:

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.

—Albert Einstein​

 

It's seen more like deism or even just being poetic.

 

There are only 7 epistles that are thought to actually have been written by Paul. Also, I'm not sure how you made the leap from "Okay, Paul wrote the epistles" to "Okay, that means the disciples wrote the Synoptic Gospels". As I have already said, both commentary Bibles and the Catholic Church admit that this isn't accurate.

 

I already admitted that I created a thread telling people to ignore you.

 

Well of course it is, by people who are determined not to let facts undermine their dearly held prejudices.

 

Einstein spoke out about being called a theist.

 

no that was deism maybe the guy flip flopped or spoke inconsistently when it came to god but that quote still looks like deism

 

How plain must I (and Albert) make it?

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/albert-einstein-god-religion-theology.htm

The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein)

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954, The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press)

 

Getting emotional now are you? We are not interested in how you feel, but we are interested in what you KNOW. No! YOU "can't take supernatural claims at face value and expect to be taken seriously by other people." You see, your little projection of what you cannot do has no effect upon what I or others can do.