It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: surfer_soul
Is the universe and our existence not proof enough? If it wasn’t created then how has it come into existence?
You don’t have the problem of which one. You are assuming to believe in god you must in turn believe in some religion which is nonsense.
In other words it would be easier to say one is agnostic, and admit they don’t know. As I have already pointed out there is no scientific proof one way or the other.
So why jump to the conclusion there definitely isn’t?
originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Ruiner1978
"not on something that was observed"
originally posted by: daskakik
the majority of people believe in some religion and that is the POV that they are coming from.
With respect to its great contributions to society, I think it is important to make a case that science is really affecting society more like a religion now than a field of study or a resource base of useful information.
Modern Scientific beliefs are based upon a leap of faith in the big bang theory. It has become a belief system based on faith and therefore another form of religion. Scientists, like priests can explain their beliefs but the everyday people accept it all on faith. Scientists and doctors are the priests of this new religion, getting angry and crying "heresy" when anyone respectfully disagrees with them.
Has Science become a Religion
Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses
originally posted by: daskakik
originally posted by: surfer_soul
Is the universe and our existence not proof enough? If it wasn’t created then how has it come into existence?
For some, no.
ETA: Maybe it has always been.
You don’t have the problem of which one. You are assuming to believe in god you must in turn believe in some religion which is nonsense.
That isn't what I said. I said the majority of people believe in some religion and that is the POV that they are coming from.
In other words it would be easier to say one is agnostic, and admit they don’t know. As I have already pointed out there is no scientific proof one way or the other.
So why jump to the conclusion there definitely isn’t?
The point is that 9 times out of 10, when I speak with someone, what they mean by creator is the one from the Abrahamic faiths and I feel comfortable saying that that isn't the creator.
originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Ruiner1978
Even in context it is a negative.
I just trimmed the excess, guess I should have just used bold to meet you high form standards.
So how does one prove that it wasn't written from observations?
Are you suggesting that it CAN'T be proved that someone committed suicide and WASN'T murdered either??
Same principle...
originally posted by: surfer_soul
Quite a bit more logic than the universe popping into existence and creating itself from nothing...
Theists don’t hate science, many scientists believe in god. Believing in god doesn’t mean you have to believe in any or all of the doctrines of a particular religion. Or even believe in religion at all. One of the fundamental principles of science is you don’t get something from nothing, so why shouldn’t scientists believe in an ultimate creator?
I can fully understand someone wishing to reject religion. I don’t follow any myself. I would agree with someone who said we can’t know or understand anything about god or a creator, and I would understand the position of someone who said we can’t know one way or the other. As with the agnostic. But what I don’t get is the person who says no, there is definitely no creator. As with the atheist, when it can’t be scientifically proven one way or the other. Now that I find suspicious..
originally posted by: Ruiner1978
So does anyone have proof that ancient scripture is purely based on man's imagination, and not on something that was observed or not?
Completely beside the point...
Did I observe the mouse or imagine it?
originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Ruiner1978
Honestly, I just have to read the tower of babel story and know that it didn't happen as told. The tower almost reached heaven so god had to magically mess with peoples tongues?
So there is that. Is that proof to you? It might be but it isn't scientific proof because you can't prove a negative.
originally posted by: surfer_soul
This is why I find atheists as abhorrent as the most extreme religious cultists. It’s nothing but blind faith in that which they desire to be true
How about the new atheism of our day? I wish I could report otherwise, but it has all the hallmarks of a stealth religion...
Atheism as a Stealth Religion
Ironically, most atheists are disgusted with Christianity because atheists claim Christianity requires “blind faith” or “blind trust.” But by the very definition of the name they carry, atheists in fact are the ones who have based their beliefs on the absence of evidence.
Atheists are a people “without a belief in theism” not because they have disproved the existence of God with evidence, but rather because they claim there is an absence of evidence for God. They believe there is no God because they cannot see any evidence of God. Atheists trust there is no God not because of what they see, but because of what they cannot see. Their conviction stems from things not seen.
The Blind Faith of Atheism
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: Ruiner1978
So does anyone have proof that ancient scripture is purely based on man's imagination, and not on something that was observed or not?
I use critical thinking.