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.

 

Through the eyes of Atheism

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

What you just described is the enjoyment of God's gift that is life itself and thus the enjoyment of God. God doesn't need to insert himself as an intermediary or external entity, only to express his love in mutuality. In this sense God as love deserves love in kind, but love isn't love unless it is free.


Are you here just to preach?

Let's cut to the chase. Can you demonstrate these beliefs of yours as being true?




posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by randyvs
 


I mean that to our perception that is how life and death work. Death, to me, is going to be a lot like before I was born. I wasn't alive and I couldn't experience anything. The difference is, barring some sort of zombie apocalypse
, I'm not going to be born ever again after I die.

Penn Jilette from Penn and Teller said it kinda like this in a recent interview with Piers Morgan, I'm paraphrasing here: I'm not afraid of 1890, yet I wasn't alive then, why should I be afraid of 2090?


Ok I just wanted to give you chance to look how you wrote that instead of jumping all over it. Unless you know something I don't know about after we die ? If you do ? You better damn well tell me ?



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


All I have to give vernacular to terms is the information I receive. If atheists and web dictionaries tell me atheist believe there is no god then that is terminology I must accept.


It doesn't sound to me as if you've ever consulted an atheist or a dictionary on the matter.

However, if you are content with operating on improper definitions don't be surprised when you're called out for not knowing about that which you speak. If you're interested in learning more I will be happy to help.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
My opinion:

Atheism is a lack of belief in faith and God.

But we can still believe in a hundred thousand other things. Just because we don't think a supernatural entity built the earth, doesn't mean we can't believe in supernova's, galaxies, and the infinite number of mysteries out there.

You say it's all built by a god or gods, I say it's not - but those anomalies and universal wonders still exist.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by goldentorch
Because I feel joy in life and am able to be moved by other people through art and science etc: why should I ascribe that ability to feel to an outside agency as an intermediatory between myself and the other person's creative and emotional ability to move me. Why do we need this imaginary being interdicting in human affairs.


Well my answer is, because he's not imaginary. And because without him ? We arn't even here.

Mr. lizard

Hey thanks for your interest Liz. Sorry the thread seems to be dying down at this point.
edit on 24-8-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Life as we experience it, is a byproduct of an evolutionary process, eminating from a source, and we, as an expression of that process, and as an evolving and involving process itself (not a "thing"), are in an inextricable relationship with the source of all life and existence (ie: God). Furthermore, as highly evolved sentients and as self aware conscious beings, as the most recent addition to the long ascent of consciousness from single celled to the most highly evolved, we contain, at the most fundamental level, a representation of the whole thing or in other words, we reside in a non-local, holpgraphic universe who's base and root and root and source is consciousness and who's highest aim or end game is also consciousness - as a type of "chip off the old block". Anything less than this represents a false separation or differentiation from source, which at best can only be arbitrarily selected, when, in truth, as the Buddhists point out, there is no separate self. "Thou art that". That said however, there is still a fundamental I-thou relationship WITH Source, since the Godhead is also transcendant, and as such, cannot be subject to any discernment or distinction. Therefore, BOTH positions are correct, but the atheist for the most part is approaching the issue from a contemptuous bias prior to investigation, which is disingenuous. If he was honest, he would be forced to admit that he's an agnostic.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Put another way...

"God is spirit and truth" or full conciousness as reality ie: God-conscious (see Jesus' reframe of "God" to the "Woman at the well")

Or put another way

Love, as a first last cause of existence (sharing in mutuality), made conscious as a first/last cause, is atonement (at one ment) with God, and so any person, whether Jesus or whoever, who loves with full conscious awareness (giving of self for the sake of another's spiritual growth and well being), and who then thinks, says and does what is in full accord with that awareness (Jesus being a model of leadership in this regard), in their relationship between self AND other, may be considered at one with God ie: doing the will of God. Taken to it's limit, in terms of the psychological and spiritual evolution (and involution) of the human being, there is no distinction between the will of self and the will of God as the will to love with full awareness and understanding. This is where we then pass into the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven ie: where God is realized, not externalized ie: "passing away" while giving everything over in a type of self-referencial, and continually evolving, eternal recurrence, making of "God" as a conceptualization, no longer relevant or neccessary, but never denied as per atheism's no-God conception.

"I have food you know nothing about."

"Who's been giving him food?"


"My food is to do the will of the one who sent me."



by "me" here, Jesus can only be referring to his re-born from above spiritual self, which he came to identify with as himself ie: "I and the father (first father of creation) are one".

We are ready to understand these things now I do believe, and it's not unreasonable, or without it's own logic (logos).

The Great Work, and the Wisdom of the Ages, the "kingdom of heaven" is still at hand, even now, as it always was, is, and will be, in accord with he who was, who is, and who is to come - in spirit and in truth.

"And as my father has sent me, even so send I you."

God Bless, and with Love (seems appropriate to say it here)

NAM


edit on 24-8-2011 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Happy to help you say? Hmmm.

How about you poll a couple thousand atheist in order to get a consensus on what the terminology for atheism is? While you're gathering opinions, get some video evidence too - that why no one will be able to say pics or it didn't happen. If the overall view is that they have no belief you will win the argument.

Just think, you could be the guy who redefined atheism, just to win an argument. You should do it!



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
The big problem with Christianity, as it's predominantly understood according to church doctrine, is the particularization, and worship OF Jesus as a seperate God (from self). Ironically, the goal and object of the "xtian fundies", to receive the living Christ "into one's heart" as a spiritual co-mingling of the spirit of God and man rejoined (separation removed) is right, so they're both wrong AND right for both the wrong and the right reasons! I think the same sort of thing applies here in terms of these arguments between theists and atheists, but it's best to be informed, and intelligent in our approach to these things, than ignorant and dumb, imho.

"There is a principal which operates as a bar against all information and proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man (person) in everlasting ignorance. That principal is called - contempt, prior to investigation."
~ Herbert Spencer



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 

Are you aware of how easy, how convenient and how shallow your position really is as an "atheist"? Just curious, if you've also put yourself through the intellectual wringer you wish to subject everyone else to who struggles with these deep questions by saying (with arms crossed) "prove it to me".

At least I'm willing to subject the map of reality i've discovered and adopted to the scrutiny of others.

What do YOU believe, in terms of the meaning and/or purpose of life, and everything..?


edit on 24-8-2011 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   
all i hear is wah wah life is scary without god.

all you got to do is learn to sleep without the nightlight.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 

That's all you hear eh?

Let me tell you something. Union or communion with God is scarier than you think.. people who've been "touched" by the spirit can attest to this, but you're right in a way if we are talking about "the dark night of the soul" or the unexpected moment when the rains come and the winds blow against our "house" as it will and does for every man, at some point or another. We are all put to the test, and for many of us, who are not entirely "righteous" or perfect, it is good for us that our righteousness is accounted to us by our faith as it was with Abraham, and how can it be any other way?

It is the height of arrogance, to have no need for God, imho.


edit on 24-8-2011 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


You mean like the human sacrafices many cultures did during times of duress.

That all turned out to be pitifull ignorant superstition... as will be your praying when the wind begins to blow. So sit in your straw house and spout your ignorance to all the other sheep so that they will be unprepared and fall dead the moment their faith is taken from them.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 

The wind blew against my house, but the rock of ages held firm at the foundation.
Faith is only removed by gnosis, which is knowledge.
It's a process of initiation, from master to student, but it requires an open mind.
And it's not the 99 who are righteous, but the one lost sheep God sent the Christ to save (retrieve).
If you understood it, gratitude not condemnation would be your response.

It is said that when you comisserate with your neighbor, and he thanks you, he is kind-hearted, but if he scorns you, he his hard-hearted..



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


You mean like the human sacrafices many cultures did during times of duress.

That all turned out to be pitifull ignorant superstition... as will be your praying when the wind begins to blow. So sit in your straw house and spout your ignorance to all the other sheep so that they will be unprepared and fall dead the moment their faith is taken from them.


This seems a little backwards to me. First time I've seen the unbeliever with foreknowledge.

Also, it would be cool if you could actually hear the words, as you read them on screen, but you can't. So what are you talk'in about ?



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


*Sigh*

I hate having to do this crap... it really degrades my faith in humanity.


I just think it's important to know, what we're looking at, if atheism is correct ?


In this sentence, you use a word that apparently you do not understand.

Because if you understood the word, most of your post would be revealed to you as utter hyperbolic ignorance.

And no, the word is not "Atheism"

I'll get to that later.



If I look at the world through the eyes of atheism ? Doesn't man suddenly become far less, than what he has over millennia, come to believe himself to be ? Atheism says, there is nothing spiritual about existence and that man does not have a soul. That anything paranormal is all BS and this mundane existance, has come about for however long. So life is simply a space between two nothings.


I'm not even going to bother with this part, as others in this thread have already highlighted the non-exclusion of spirituality and atheism.


Basically, it seems as though atheism, takes the rules of empirical science to far and applies them to life. Science being the study of observable phenomena.


And here is the part where you have failed.

And the irony is, that you even spelled out EXACTLY WHY you failed.

Q: What is Atheism?
A: The belief in no god, or the lack of belief in God.

Q: What is Theism?
A: The belief in a god.

Q: What is *SCIENCE*?
A: The study of observable phenomenon.

Science derives from the latin word "Scientia" which means "Knowledge" which is the word ("Know", or "To Know") that I was talking about before that you apparently do not understand.

Science can say absolutely *NOTHING* about Atheism, or Theism, because both deal with something that is..... and listen closely here....

BEYOND THE REALM

OF THE OBSERVABLE UNIVERSE[/SIZE]

Equating Atheism to the advance of "Science" is a ludicrous proposition that is juxtaposed more from ignorance of the meanings of the words, than any semblance of rational thought.

One cannot ever Capture God, or a Lack of God in a test tube for study.

We cannot measure the spectral emission lines of God or a Lack of God.

We cannot study the Actual attributes of God or a Lack of God.... because the entire CONCEPT of god, *OR A LACK OF A GOD* is not *OBSERVABLE*

It is not TESTABLE, it is not KNOWLEDGE, and *NEVER WILL BE*

One cannot ever *KNOW* whether there is a god, or whether there is NO god.

And the main reasons are as follows:

1. One cannot *KNOW* that god doesn't exist, because you cannot PROVE a negative... it's like trying to prove that Invisible, intangible unicorns DON'T exist... it is impossible to gather evidence for the NON-EXISTENCE of a thing.

2. The attributes of GOD are *TOTALLY BEYOND THE REALM OF HUMAN COMPREHENSION*. Take "Omniscience" for example.... what if a being descended from the sky, TODAY, and claimed it was god, and possessed Omniscience?

How *EXACTLY* would you test that?

Sure, maybe they know A LOT of stuff... but in order to TEST whether or not they KNOW *EVERYTHING*....

YOU WOULD HAVE TO KNOW EVERYTHING AS WELL[/SIZE]


Atheism dosn't believe anything out of the ordinary ever does or ever has happened.


Did you really write this line? Honestly?



But isn't it out of the ordinary, for mankind to have come into this existence, and make up
a whole part of himself that says the exact opposite? If mankind only evolved some how ? Why would he evolve with a belief in deitys ?


*sigh*


Atheism limits this existance to things it finds rational. But is that even rational ?


No, it doesn't...

I just can't... I can't imagine.... why you would even THINK this... Are you thinking?

Is this all just feelings? Some sort of emotional outpouring?



Look, I'm not trying to insult you, or degrade you.... but I can understand if you believe that the tone of my post comes off as sort of condescending.... and honestly, It kind of does.

I am here to deny Ignorance, which is a condition that some people suffer where they lack knowledge of something.

And too often, I have seen the religious peoples of the world, attempt to shoehorn *SCIENCE* into Atheism, as if SCIENCE ITSELF is an attack against their GOD.

And really, it just makes my Blood BOIL.

The White hot fury of a thousand suns, burning in my BRAIN, compels me to verbally thwart this form of ignorance wherever it appears.


Atheism is not SCIENCE.

SCIENCE is not ANTI-RELIGION.

Because Science is about what we *KNOW*, not about what we BELIEVE.

RELIGION is about what we believe but can never prove..... *NOT SCIENCE*


Calling Atheism, "Science" is the most heinous insult to Human Language and thought that I can possibly conceive of.



Now, I'm sorry for yelling..... But I meant every word.
edit on 24-8-2011 by ErtaiNaGia because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
I do not need a belief in a god in order to think that our lives have value and purpose. Nor do I need a belief in a god to keep me from raping, murdering, stealing, etc. There are plenty who believe who still do those things.....
edit on 24-8-2011 by Hydroman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


He must be referring to some sort of eschaton of self-realization, which I've alluded to in a previous post, but with God included in the framework of an indespensible i-thou relationship, forever drawing us forward in mutual discovery, appreciation and increasing degrees of love and awareness ie: God passes away as we become increasingly God realized, although paradoxically, the first/last cause, the reason (word, logos) can never pass away. I see it as a headlong plungs into the mystery of an evolutionary eternal recurrence.

He's referring to small-minded and ignorant faith, without any recognition that there's any other kind ie: ASS-U-MING.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 


Star/Flag

I'm going to read that again and again. You may feel it comes off as condescending and maybe you're right. All 'I' see,is the Truth.

What a brilliant post.

ok,back to lurking,and learning. wow..



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 


Alright, I actually understood most of that believe it or not. Just one thing perhaps you can rephrase for me the part after
"Sigh".

I have no idea where I said," science is atheism ". Or even what provoked your big bombastic rant involving the greek and latin meaning of words when I'm just trying to make a few simple observations about atheism. Look all I'm say'in is, somebody, may have had a little to much caffine today.

The one thing I did say, was that atheism, seems to carry the rules/protocols, of empirical science a bit to far to apply it to life. ie the belief in observable phenomena.

The only thing I can figure is you might be lookiing for my other thread. Science fails to exclude God. Would you like a link for that ?


One other thing, light is an attribute of God the way I see it. You are an attribute of God.



edit on 24-8-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)
:
edit on 24-8-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-8-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-8-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join