The death of Atheism

[Jobar]

I suspect that when you say

using some very basic filtering

you mean filter through templates that look quite like Hebrew letters, right?

(Hi, Eudaimonist!)

 

[Tinker Grey]

It was explained to me by a fellow site member here with a particularly high post count that the mocking and "persecution" that religionists receive, particularly those of the Christian YEC bent, was "prophesied" in the Bible, and is, in his interpretation, a validation of sorts that he/they are on the right path.

Thus, Bible interpretations trump observations of reality. Or something like that.

But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. - Carl Sagan

I like to refer to this phenomenon as argumentum ad martyrdom.

 

[bhsmte]

Others can. Why does one who can't, get so confident that their understanding of the belief is correct?

Some rely on objective evidence, some rely on personal perceptions of experience.

Which one each person relies upon, would depend on their personal psyche and what satisfied the same.

 

[Davian]

hmm, I don't think you can call being mocked on an internet forum persecution.

Armoured said it better than I, but I was only relating what I was told.

Christians have been, and still are more than any other religion, subject to real persecution throughout the world for their faith, that was what was prophesied.

I expect that the writers of the bible were learned men, and they would have knowledge of the troubles had by other previous religions, and that they "prophesied" that the untestable and unevidenced claims of Christianity - proffered, at times, at the point of a sword, would result in trouble for those doing so, is not a stretch of the imagination.

 

[variant]

hmm, I don't think you can call being mocked on an internet forum persecution. Christians have been, and still are more than any other religion, subject to real persecution throughout the world for their faith, that was what was prophesied.

Being mocked can be more effective under some circumstances.

If you are willing to kill someone over their ideas you have to take them seriously.

 

[variant]

Even worse, it excludes "I don't know" as a valid response, and that means that it all too conveniently drops any necessity for providing a positive case for one's conclusion.

That is sham reasoning that apologetics too often resorts to.


eudaimonia,

Mark

It's odd that even completely accepting the analysis, what it would simply mean is there is some basic mathematical correlation between how letters look and sound in Hebrew.

Given that the brain has to do something similar to a mathematical transformation to interpret both sound, light and symbol, the result would be more interesting from a "this may give us insight into how the brain works" perspective than a "this proves God is real" perspective.

 

[Holoman]

Armoured said it better than I, but I was only relating what I was told.

I expect that the writers of the bible were learned men, and they would have knowledge of the troubles had by other previous religions, and that they "prophesied" that the untestable and unevidenced claims of Christianity - proffered, at times, at the point of a sword, would result in trouble for those doing so, is not a stretch of the imagination.

Yes, sorry I wasn't attributing it to you just quoted you as you brought it up.

It certainly wasn't an imaginative prophesy, given the Jews themselves had been persecuted so much. Of course, the bolded part is just falacious. Firstly Christ never instructed his disciples to spread word through a sword, in fact he forbade it. When Jesus was arrested his disciple drew a sword and cut the ear off a soldier, to which Christ rebuked him and put the ear back on. The symbolism is pretty obvious, when you draw arms you cut the ears off of people and they will not listen to you. Truth cannot be spread through force of will and the disciples did not spread their faith through fighting. Secondly their claims weren't unevidenced as they had literally seen the resurrected Jesus, that much historical scholars widely accept without criticism (even the atheists). That this was some delusion or tom foolery is what the non-Christian must put their money on.

 

[dvduval]

For me this is more evidence that if someone will believe this, they will believe more harmful teachings in the guise of it coming from God. I'm not an athiest, but I think there is strong evidence that religion has caused more harm than good in this world.

 

[Soyeong]

I don't think ancient Hebrew letters look the same as modern Hebrew.

 

[Davian]

Yes, sorry I wasn't attributing it to you just quoted you as you brought it up.

It certainly wasn't an imaginative prophesy, given the Jews themselves had been persecuted so much. Of course, the bolded part is just falacious. Firstly Christ never instructed his disciples to spread word through a sword, in fact he forbade it.

I never mentioned otherwise. In the context you are responding to, we were discussing those that only have the bible stories to go on, as in current day.

When Jesus was arrested his disciple drew a sword and cut the ear off a soldier, to which Christ rebuked him and put the ear back on.

Allegedly. But, this is irrelevant to the point being made.

The symbolism is pretty obvious, when you draw arms you cut the ears off of people and they will not listen to you. Truth cannot be spread through force of will

Religious opinion can be spread by force.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war#Christianity

and the disciples did not spread their faith through fighting.

Irrelevant. That was not the context I was speaking to.

Secondly their claims weren't unevidenced as they had literally seen the resurrected Jesus, that much historical scholars widely accept without criticism (even the atheists).

Stories of evidence are not evidence.

That this was some delusion or tom foolery is what the non-Christian must put their money on.

Show me wrong.

 

[ChiefOfBackEnd]

This was a funny and almost charmingly earnest thread to read through.

If you're going to announce "Death of Atheism", you better have video of God materializing and answering questions from reporters or something.

Of course, then we'd just ask, "how can we know you're really God? And, why have you left no proof of your existence in the past four and a half billion years?"

But at least that would be a decent start.

You poor dear thing. You just have a fundamental misunderstanding evidence, faith, belief, science, mentally rigorous thought, or almost anything.

What you did is about as rediculous as announcing the death of Christianity because a lady in Des Moines saw the image of Zeus in the pattern of stripes of a Zebra at the zoo! Therefore, ipso facto... this proves Greek Mythology! Hoorah-time!!!

 

[ChiefOfBackEnd]

<staff edit>

The good news is, you really never left! Since you can't be mad at something that you don't believe in, your anger proves you never lost your faith.

Yay for you!

 

[Ken-1122]

Hello.

I singed up to spread the word of the death of athesim.

Apperently, the frequencies of sound waves look like Hebrew letters. I've recorded a video that presents this scientific discovery, and explains how it kills atheism. This discovery is completely scientific and empirical and I though Christians will be interested.

Please excuse my English and accent.

Atheism is not something that can be killed

K

 

[ChiefOfBackEnd]

Some people just can't reconcile the belief, with reality and they can't pretend they believe when they don't.

And actually, atheism has been growing the world over for many decades.

Bingo! I don't belive in Santa Claus either. But not because I don't *want* to... it would be great if he were real. Free Christmas presents from a faster-than-light fat guy who breaks into your house, not to steal stuff... but to leave stuff that you want?? Yes please.

But, the whole idea sounds rediculous and stupid, plus all the evidence points to it actually being a concept your parents used to coerce you into behaving throughout the Christmas season.

See? Atheism isn't some weird denial of one's own *wants*, it's just impossible to believe in an invisible space wizard.

 

[dynastynyy]

death of atheism? Atheism is on the rise, and the death of religion should commence far sooner than the death of atheism. And rightfully so.

Look at all the dead people over religion.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Hello.

I singed up to spread the word of the death of athesim.

Apperently, the frequencies of sound waves look like Hebrew letters. I've recorded a video that presents this scientific discovery, and explains how it kills atheism. This discovery is completely scientific and empirical and I though Christians will be interested.

Please excuse my English and accent.

Interesting, I would have to look deeper into this to verify

I knew a friend who found whole paragraphs of hidden bible codes in the bible about Jesus These yhings are fascinating

 

[oi_antz]

Some rely on objective evidence, some rely on personal perceptions of experience.

Which one each person relies upon, would depend on their personal psyche and what satisfied the same.

Hey, thanks for this answer! Am I right to understand you place the error on the different observations of reality between someone who holds a belief vs someone who doesn't? I was rather placing the error on the different understandings of the belief between the one that does and doesn't hold that belief. I suppose having heard this, both are possible. Eg, beliefs cause us to view reality accordingly. Yet, there is a case for my idea. If somebody does hold a belief and finds it consistent with reality, yet someone else finds that belief to be inconsistent with reality, my question is why does the one discarding the belief have confidence that they have understood the belief correctly? (Also I am aware there is other possible reasons for the contention). I ask this because I notice people often discard beliefs that are realistically plausible, while also demonstrating that they have an incorrect understanding of the belief. Probably the answer has something to do with human condition of superiority.

 

[Annakirk]

So...what computer program did you use? I'd like to try this for myself.

 

[RickyVernio]

Apart from the fact that this is nonsense ...

Atheism require proof no more than any other faith does. The only difference is that its proponents pretend to have it.

 

[bhsmte]

Hey, thanks for this answer! Am I right to understand you place the error on the different observations of reality between someone who holds a belief vs someone who doesn't? I was rather placing the error on the different understandings of the belief between the one that does and doesn't hold that belief. I suppose having heard this, both are possible. Eg, beliefs cause us to view reality accordingly. Yet, there is a case for my idea. If somebody does hold a belief and finds it consistent with reality, yet someone else finds that belief to be inconsistent with reality, my question is why does the one discarding the belief have confidence that they have understood the belief correctly? (Also I am aware there is other possible reasons for the contention). I ask this because I notice people often discard beliefs that are realistically plausible, while also demonstrating that they have an incorrect understanding of the belief. Probably the answer has something to do with human condition of superiority.

All of the above, depends on how one goes about reconciling any religious concept with reality and determining whether it is believable or not.

As I stated, some people are motivated to latch onto their personal perceptions and others are motivated to achieve objective verification, that is outside of their personal perceptions, or some sort of objective verification.

No right or wrong approach, to each person's own.