More Theist arguments
Offline Well here are more Theist arguments I get, and the reason I post them here, is not to alert you of any new arguments, but rather I'm just not that intelligent enough to answer some of them. So maybe you more intellectual types can help me out.
Argument 1: "Newton and Einstein believed in God, and they are much smarter than many atheists." So, because Genius's had believed in God, that must give more credibility to God.
Argument 2: "If Atheists are trying to get rid of Religion, doesn't that make them as bad as Religious people who want to get rid of other religions, beliefs, or groups of people?" (whether it's ethnicity or sexual orientation)
Argument 3: "Why can't Atheists just get along with (insert religion)?" Personally I believe that Religions are basically giant cults, and usually those are looked down on and take care of themselves.. However they make a more peaceful point. Though I also think Religion has detriments to human progress..
- Login to post comments
I don't think that it makes belief in God more credible, but it does sort of demonstrate the dogmatic or xenophobic position of more modern day atheism, which seems to insist that you can't believe in the Bible and be a good scientist. Newton said “No sciences are better attested to than the Bible.” Newton and Einstein were better scientist than any dogmatic atheist I have ever encountered.
They are religious in every sense of the word. They, Atheists, are just another cultic, fanatic bunch of xenophobes.
Because they, like religion in the past, don't want anyone to be allowed to think for themselves. To think differently than them. They don't see this as being their downfall as it was with religion, though.
Cultic, yea so, when is the next meeting guys? And um, where is our book of religious beliefs, and about the rituals..I forgot my body of christ biscuits and blood.
Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin
Newton and Einstein, both pretty smart, and they believed in god? That's a pretty good arguement but I wonder how good their eye sight was, after all I have 20/15 which is better than 20/20 and I still can't see any evidence.
Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs
Just tell them that is pointless unless you can explain why that person believed what they did, then question the belief. Just tell them that what the people are known as intelligent for was not their religious beliefs.
Sort of. We aren't trying to get rid of religion, it is more of informing that religion is BELIEF, and not necessarily TRUTH. Our goal (well, some of us) is to explain what we think is the correct way to understand reality to people with dissimilar perspectives. This is what religions do, but they do not have uncertainty as their basic tenet. Remember, atheism is a LACK of belief, an agnostic is an atheist. This is our opinion, however, as backed by what we typically hold as our standard to truth: science. All we can do is explain why our view is more rational. Hence the rational response squad as the name of this site. When someone claims truth regarding something, in this case reality, they must have a standard for truth. Typically atheists hold science as that, as to deny its benefits is ridiculous. Obviously the reasons are numerous. The point is, however, that we are trying to explain to others how we see the world. The reason we don't see ourselves as 'as bad as religion' is because we do not say this is it and there is no other way, just as science's most positive claim will always be offset with 'to the best of our knowledge.' Religion (typically) does not allow change, and this is where we take issue.
I think we can. The issue, as I said above, is the rigidity of religion. Most religions are reluctant to change their tenets. A good example is the Catholic Church. With Vatican II they accepted many scientific facts that they previously rejected. In the future, I suspect they will be more accepting of homosexuality and will finally no longer be a sexist institution, providing it adapts before it eventually falls wayside to some future religion.
Religion can be detrimental in not accepting things which are apparent in the eyes of some. Consequently, the followers reject those things, inhibiting progress. If religion were more flexible and realized that it may not be correct in its beliefs, then it would certainly be easier to get along with them. Remember that most atheists do not infringe on a theist's right to believe whatever they want, we just encourage a particular view with our standard of truth.
David, stop using terms that, by definition, cannot apply to atheism; you might look more intelligent if you did.
My Website About Roller Coaster Design
This is the same Einstein as referred to here:
Newton also believed in the now totally discredited 'science' of Alchemy.
We do not insist that a believer cannot be a good scientist, it depends on the nature of their belief. If they deny well-established science in favour of some religious doctrine, they are not good scientists.
It is hard to see how a Creationist can be a good scientist, but a Roman Catholic like Kenneth Miller, who spoke against 'Intelligent Design' proponent Michael Behe at the Dover Trial, and in support of the teaching of Evolution, seems to be a good scientist.
We would rather people did think for themselves, and not just buy what a preacher or any one book says.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
This is nothing more than the classic appeal to authority. Newton did a number of great things. Calculus, optics and gravity are the major ones. He also came up with milled edges on coins (so that it would be obvious if a coin had been cut to remove some of the silver). He also may have invented that “cat door” (supposedly so that he did not have to keep letting the cat in and out when he did his work on optics).
Newton was also found at death to have had so much mercury in his body that he must have been insane.
Einstein for his part, did not believe in a god that cared about everyone's doddlybopper. What he said about god pretty much comes down to the idea of the whole universe as what he meant.
Past that, what about the legion of scientists who are atheists? Do they carry authority or is authority vested only in those people who are long dead and cannot speak for themselves?
Not really. Personally, I don't give a shit what you believe. However, I think that there is a concept of “too much information”. When one of my co-workers jumps up from her desk and tells everyone that she suddenly needs to pee, that is a TMI moment.
You stuck your prick up your boyfriend's ass?
You took communion on Sunday?
Still a whole TMI moment.
Hey you! Get back in the closet!
Seriously, religion did not get where it is by being quiet about stuff. Who else gained attention by being quiet about stuff? I don't care if you are a communist, a democrat, black or gay, you gain attention by getting in people's faces.
=