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.

 

Are Atheist Arrogant

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Personal as in: you pray and believe he/she/it listens...so yeah, Einstein DEFINITELY didn't believe in a judeo-Christian god.


The world belongs to God, there is nothing personal about it except my views on how I perceive God, Yes I am not being very personal about this I know...

Einstein knew of God he spoke very cautiously about him, He was smarter than I that's for sure.

You can have a piece of God I share no problem, we all belong to God... even Satan !




posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Whether he was or wasn't an atheist is irrelevant, I could care less about his personal beliefs just as I could care less that Newton believed in Alchemy.


Isaac Newton happens to be the second most influential man in history, even above Einstein...

would the Atheist like to try to steal him too ?

see signature below...



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact
 


Way to not address anything I said.

And no.

You can keep Newton, in fact you can keep everyone you actually genuinely believe in a God. Whether someone is an atheist or theist is entirely irrelevant, it is the reasoning, how they came to their conclusion and why they continue to either lack or hold a belief in God(s) that is important. We could sit here until we're blue in the mouth naming great thinkers and debating their stance's on God(s) but each would just be a useless argument from authority.

He may have done a lot of great work but he believed a lot of batsnip crazy things, alchemy being one of them.

By the way, something I've left out until now - even if atheists are arrogant does that make them wrong? Does the fervor one shows for his/her stance really indicate whether or not its true? Polite or rude, arrogant or humble neither effects the truth.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Given that you mad this statement in another post...



Atheist have no vision.


...I'm pretty sure believers can be just as arrogant as people who don't believe in a god we have no proof even exists


Love exists take a look sometime in public, so hypocritical of the atheists because even they have Love and Marriage ect...


What does that have to do with anything I posted??? Or are you claiming love is proof for god?


What's next? Wanna claim morals are from god too?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Here is the problem. If you know your right no matter how humble or laid back you want to be, it always leads to arrogance in any field of knowledge, it's human nature. Although I have meet people who are right on a topic and never mount a defense they just smile and carry on.
Radical atheism is arrogant, it can't help itself, it is embedded in it's very existence.
There are some people on YouTube like this. And the ones on ATS well they are the ones posting in a dedicated religious sub-forum of ATS. It is a bit of an invasion of late and it must be fought. I think it's because ATS/BTS were merged.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:21 AM
link   
I think atheists are somehow confused because of tellings of others. Christianity is a religion in word and deed. We are erected in faith. We don't talk about it that much, instead we go on with life and take on what comes upon our roads. We live. That is christianity. The lifestyle of the living.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
Here is the problem. If you know your right no matter how humble or laid back you want to be, it always leads to arrogance in any field of knowledge, it's human nature. Although I have meet people who are right on a topic and never mount a defense they just smile and carry on.
Radical atheism is arrogant, it can't help itself, it is embedded in it's very existence.
There are some people on YouTube like this. And the ones on ATS well they are the ones posting in a dedicated religious sub-forum of ATS. It is a bit of an invasion of late and it must be fought. I think it's because ATS/BTS were merged.


I made a school paper on the exact same topic i made on ATS about how existence was created. I got a full score with a comment saying. Why didn't i think of that. From my teacher.

No one on ATS challenge my post either. Because it makes a lot of sense. More sense then the Big Bang theory.

My post is called: Genesis chapter 1. Explained with a bit of pseudoscience.

The Big Bang theory is built on pseudoscience too. The Big Bang theory cant be confirmed. And i know why to.

We can not measure time from 2010 to 0. There is no way we can observe the first light from the Big Bang theory. Because there is nothing that can reflect that light. Not if light expans out wards. There should be nothing but total darkness beyond the Big Bang. The light would vanish within the infinite darkness.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Actually, we know the big bang happened and have scientific evidence as backup. The only thing we don't know (yet) is what caused it in the first place...but they're about to launch a new satellite that will allow scientist to check out the time BEFORE the big bang.

There is NO proof for talking snakes and humans being created through incest by a single couple though.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by spy66
 


Actually, we know the big bang happened and have scientific evidence as backup. The only thing we don't know (yet) is what caused it in the first place...but they're about to launch a new satellite that will allow scientist to check out the time BEFORE the big bang.

There is NO proof for talking snakes and humans being created through incest by a single couple though.


There are no solid facts that support the Big Bang it is just a theory still. The light and radiation that they claim they have observed is not any proof once or ever. It can't be proven that it is from the Big Bang. They cant prove where its from at all. They can just observe it, time it and make a claim.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by spy66
 


Actually, we know the big bang happened and have scientific evidence as backup. The only thing we don't know (yet) is what caused it in the first place...but they're about to launch a new satellite that will allow scientist to check out the time BEFORE the big bang.

There is NO proof for talking snakes and humans being created through incest by a single couple though.


There are no solid facts that support the Big Bang it is just a theory still. The light and radiation that they claim they have observed is not any proof once or ever. It can't be proven that it is from the Big Bang. They cant prove where its from at all. They can just observe it, time it and make a claim.


I don't think you know the definition of a scientific theory



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
yep today Atheists are still arrogant


I am mounting evidence here to support my theory, which is very 'scientific' by method of collecting data.

some just have no vision or totally took all the wrong classes in school, hehe...



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Actually, we know the big bang happened and have scientific evidence as backup. The only thing we don't know (yet) is what caused it in the first place...but they're about to launch a new satellite that will allow scientist to check out the time BEFORE the big bang.


Here is a thread posted here on ATS. It´s called "A Galaxies Cluster Older Than Possible! Scientists say."

Link

Peace
edit on 20-12-2010 by Seed76 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-12-2010 by Seed76 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact
 


You never really answer me directly. Do you understand how the word atheist is used? If you are a Christian, then you are an atheist to the Egyptian and Greek gods. Anyone with a belief is by effect going to have a disbelief in other things that contradict their belief. It is in this sense that Einstein was an atheist. Whether or not he had his own version of what god is in his head, he still did not believe in the SAME god that you believe in!

It is in this same way that an atheist can disbelieve in your god, yet still not be arrogant towards you. I believe in a type of higher order, I could call it god if I wanted to, but I'd still be an atheist TO YOU. Just as Einstein said he'd always been an atheist TO A JESUIT PRIEST. I don't want Einstein for anything, I'm not trying to claim him for atheists for some deviant purpose, I am simply trying to provide you with an illustrative example of what I am trying to clarify here.

Why do Christians assume that anytime a person uses the word "god" that they must be referring the the Christian god??? That to me, is an arrogant trait some Christians hold. You think your god is the only god despite the fact that other groups have totally different views and just as much enriching history tied to their beliefs and their gods.

Not everyone defines god as you do, Cosmic.


edit on 12/20/2010 by SpaceJ because: fix



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJ
 


God is God, I can define him... nothing else matters !

gotta run, I will respond later when I get back



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Whether he was or wasn't an atheist is irrelevant, I could care less about his personal beliefs just as I could care less that Newton believed in Alchemy.


Isaac Newton happens to be the second most influential man in history, even above Einstein...

would the Atheist like to try to steal him too ?


At last this time you're not trying to "steal" Newton for the Christians.


According to most scholars, Newton was Arian, not holding to Trinitarianism. 'In Newton's eyes, worshipping Christ as God was idolatry, to him the fundamental sin'. As well as being antitrinitarian, Newton also rejected the orthodox doctrines of the immortal soul, a personal devil and literal demons. Although he was not a Socinian he shared many similar beliefs with them. A manuscript he sent to John Locke in which he disputed the existence of the Trinity was never published.

Newton — like many contemporaries — faced the threat of severe punishment (e.g., Thomas Aikenhead) if he had been open about his religious beliefs. Heresy was a crime that could have been punishable by the loss of all property and status or even death (e.g., Blasphemy Act 1698). Because of his secrecy over his religious beliefs, Newton has been described as a Nicodemite.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJ
 

Actually the Abrahamic God is the most common in the world as he is believed by most.
Islam, Christianity, & Judaism. That's billions of people. So when people say "God" most assume you are speaking of this one. Not Zeus or Vishna or some other extinct deity like Baal or Dagon.



reply to post by Kailassa
 

I actually agree with Newton in two key area's, there is no immortality of the soul, and there is no Trinity, at least with Newton he could understand some of the bible, he was way ahead of his time for basic biblical understanding, because of his intelligence and not willing to be swayed by prior church dogma.


edit on 20-12-2010 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by spy66
 


Actually, we know the big bang happened and have scientific evidence as backup. The only thing we don't know (yet) is what caused it in the first place...but they're about to launch a new satellite that will allow scientist to check out the time BEFORE the big bang.

There is NO proof for talking snakes and humans being created through incest by a single couple though.


There are no solid facts that support the Big Bang it is just a theory still. The light and radiation that they claim they have observed is not any proof once or ever. It can't be proven that it is from the Big Bang. They cant prove where its from at all. They can just observe it, time it and make a claim.


I don't think you know the definition of a scientific theory


I think you should educate me. Maybe that will educate you at the same time. Why dont you tell all about it?

You cant hid behind a definition. A definition does not give proof unless it is presented physically with a fact.

What you are doing is using a definition as an excuse to withhold facts you dont have. Just like science does in this matter. You use the definition to reserve the right to change your theory as you learn more facts.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
reply to post by SpaceJ
 


God is God, I can define him... nothing else matters !

gotta run, I will respond later when I get back


You can define whatever you want, just like I can define the mighty spaghetti monster, but you can't prove his/her/its existence. You're essentially choosing to belief in something that isn't backed up by evidence.

If it makes you happy, fine. But you really have to come down from your high horse making false claims about atheists if your belief isn't founded in logic or rationality. It makes you look kinda silly and petty



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by SpaceJ
 

Actually the Abrahamic God is the most common in the world as he is believed by most.
Islam, Christianity, & Judaism. That's billions of people. So when people say "God" most assume you are speaking of this one. Not Zeus or Vishna or some other extinct deity like Baal or Dagon.


So the "same" god gave people different scriptures and tells them to act totally different...makes total sense. Is he schizophrenic?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 




Kaku's a genius



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join