The origins of atheism

[DogmaHunter]

It is exactly the reason. Animals know no God. If we were one of them, then we do not know God.

We are animals, no matter how much you try to redefine what words mean.
Your arbitrary premises and religiously inspired definitions of certain life forms are irrelevant as well.

 

[AV1611VET]

So you deny historical evidence when it contradicts your beliefs?

That's right.

Do you enjoy having cognitive dissonance?

That's cute.

Scripture is not evidence. Not sure why you don't understand this concept.

It's you who don't understand.

My faith is generated and solidified by the Scriptures.

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

And my faith is my evidence.

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Thus faith is our evidence of what is to come, and also evidence of things you guys can't see -- yet deny.

I define faith as:

Believing something, even when science says otherwise.

Predictably linking a biased creation website that states that anything that contradicts their beliefs is wrong. Any unbiased, non scripture evidence you'd like to present that confirm your extraordinary claims?

Using bias to rail against bias is the same thing as using bias to rail against bias.

 

[brinny]

It exists because by definition some people don't believe in God.

Would you care to elaborate?

 

[brinny]

We are animals, no matter how much you try to redefine what words mean.
Your arbitrary premises and religiously inspired definitions of certain life forms are irrelevant as well.

You are entitled to your opinion, regardless if you define yourself as an animal or not.

 

[AV1611VET]

Invisible is still detectable. You mean, undetectable.

I mean invisible.

Man's concept of invisible is still detectable.

But when God says He's invisible, He means it.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Believing something, even when science says otherwise.

It's funny how often Christians have denied that this is what faith actually is. Thank you for being so blunt.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[AV1611VET]

Words are defined by how we use them.

Yes.

We call those things "working definitions."

Unless, of course, a theologian tries to use one -- like "faith" or "kind" -- then scientists show up to pick it apart and demand a one-size-fits-all definition.

 

[Colter]

The spirit of rebellion, that seems to be the common denominator behind Atheism as a movement.

Religion is born out of the spirit of worship in addition to other spirits of mind.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why would you seek something that you believe to be fictitious?

Like going to the zoo just to hear evolution propagated through their speakers, isn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

It's funny how often Christians have denied that this is what faith actually is. Thank you for being so blunt.

I'm known for that at times!

 

[Colter]

It's funny how often Christians have denied that this is what faith actually is. Thank you for being so blunt.


eudaimonia,

Mark

If God is an absolute, eternal, infinite reality and man a finite reality, then by default faith is the only possible bridge regardless of the apparent findings of finite science in the minds if finite scientist.

 

[DogmaHunter]

You are entitled to your opinion, regardless if you define yourself as an animal or not.

It's not an opinion. It's a fact.

Homo Sapiens belongs to the kingdom of animalia. Animals. It's what the word means in the biological sense (which is the context we are talking about here):

Animal
any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli: some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animallike nutritional modes

Homo Sapiens fits that description. There's no way around that.

 

[Colter]

102:7.4 "True, many apparently religious traits can grow out of nonreligious roots. Man can, intellectually, deny God and yet be morally good, loyal, filial, honest, and even idealistic. Man may graft many purely humanistic branches onto his basic spiritual nature and thus apparently prove his contentions in behalf of a godless religion, but such an experience is devoid of survival values, God-knowingness and God- ascension. In such a mortal experience only social fruits are forthcoming, not spiritual. The graft determines the nature of the fruit, notwithstanding that the living sustenance is drawn from the roots of original divine endowment of both mind and spirit." UB 1955​

 

[brinny]

It's not an opinion. It's a fact.

Homo Sapiens belongs to the kingdom of animalia. Animals. It's what the word means in the biological sense (which is the context we are talking about here):

Animal
any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli: some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animallike nutritional modes

Homo Sapiens fits that description. There's no way around that.

I respect your religion. You are entitled to believe as you wish.

If you prefer to define yourself and to call yourself an animal, i will respect that.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I respect your religion. You are entitled to believe as you wish.

Biology is not a religion. It is a branch of science.

If you prefer to define yourself and to call yourself an animal, i will respect that.

I'm not defining anything.
It's what the word means according to dictionaries.

 

[brinny]

Biology is not a religion. It is a branch of science.



I'm not defining anything.
It's what the word means according to dictionaries.

You are entitled to your opinion and anything you wish to believe.

 

[DogmaHunter]

You are entitled to your opinion and anything you wish to believe.

Thank you.

But once again, this isn't my opinion.
It's what the word factually means. That italic text comes straight from the dictionary.

If that is what counts as an "opinion" these days, then literally everything is an "opinion" and facts don't exist.

 

[brinny]

Thank you.

But once again, this isn't my opinion.
It's what the word factually means. That italic text comes straight from the dictionary.

If that is what counts as an "opinion" these days, then literally everything is an "opinion" and facts don't exist.

Thank you for sharing what you believe in.

 

[AV1611VET]

Biology is not a religion. It is a branch of science.

Translation:

Biology is not a religion, it is a branch of one.

 

[Cearbhall]

It is exactly the reason. Animals know no God. If we were one of them, then we do not know God.

That's some amazing circular logic right there. Why bother denying reality? Why not just say that there's only one type of animal which can know God? We are one of them, so according to your belief system, obviously there's an exception to this rule.

And again, many, many Christians fully support the theory of evolution, so I don't see where you're getting the idea that it's just an atheist's excuse for not believing in God. I still fail to see what it has to do with religion. It's perfectly compatible.