Public Atheist Monument Across from 10 Commandments

I once read a book called conversations with God and in my opinion it is the best piece of literature concerning an omnipotent being. Actually I read all three books and the first one twice. Books 1 and 2 were absolutely brilliant book 3 I lost interest but it really challenged my notions of existence.

The author writes the book as a modern day go between as in he is actually having a chat with God. I really recommend it to anyone who isn’t afraid of challenging there preconceptions.

That was the only period in my life which I became religious but it wasn’t because of the book it was earlier that year however the contents of those books are all that remain relevant in my life. (For disclosure purposes that period in my life I wasn’t mentally stable so when I got better my ability to believe in such things disappeared) Now that I think about it that book is probably the reason I am not a gnostic atheist and I am agnostic instead. Anyway the god described in those books I find as being worthy of being called god if you ever read it you know what I mean.

I definitely recommend it. The books cover a wide variety of topics touched on here.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I once read a book called conversations with God and in my opinion it is the best piece of literature concerning an omnipotent being. Actually I read all three books and the first one twice. Books 1 and 2 were absolutely brilliant book 3 I lost interest but it really challenged my notions of existence.

The author writes the book as a modern day go between as in he is actually having a chat with God. I really recommend it to anyone who isn’t afraid of challenging there preconceptions.

That was the only period in my life which I became religious but it wasn’t because of the book it was earlier that year however the contents of those books are all that remain relevant in my life. (For disclosure purposes that period in my life I wasn’t mentally stable so when I got better my ability to believe in such things disappeared) Now that I think about it that book is probably the reason I am not a gnostic atheist and I am agnostic instead. Anyway the god described in those books I find as being worthy of being called god if you ever read it you know what I mean.

I definitely recommend it. The books cover a wide variety of topics touched on here.

Another good one is "Amazing Love" by Corrie Ten Boom. The only book that discusses forgiveness that has stuck with me for years on end.

Forgiveness is not rational or logical. It is downright ... insane and divine.

reply to post by GeisterFahrer


I have the opposite problem. I can't imagine a beginning or an end. I see the Nile as a metaphor for eternity. The Nile, a river in Africa, has no obvious source. It isn't created from the drain of a large lake, and I'm not sure they have even found the source of the Nile yet. They say it is fed from an underground water source, that is probably fed from oceans, that are fed from rain and run off, that is fed from the evaporation of earth's water. It's a continuous, self replenishing cycle.

What started the cycle? Another cycle, started by another cycle, ad infinitum.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by GeisterFahrer

 

I have the opposite problem. I can't imagine a beginning or an end. I see the Nile as a metaphor for eternity. The Nile, a river in Africa, has no obvious source. It isn't created from the drain of a large lake, and I'm not sure they have even found the source of the Nile yet. They say it is fed from an underground water source, that is probably fed from oceans, that are fed from rain and run off, that is fed from the evaporation of earth's water. It's a continuous, self replenishing cycle.

What started the cycle? Another cycle, started by another cycle, ad infinitum.

That is what gets me every time. You see things in cycles, I see motion in the cycles (I see motorcycles haha). No, what I mean is, the force in the cycles - not Luke Skywalker "force" - I mean the energy. Like your example of the Nile. You ask, where is the source? I ask, how did the H20 molecules form to "start" a continuous cycle to create a continuous stream of evaporation and rain ad infinitum ... not sure if that makes sense.

Where did the energy 'come from" that made the H20 molecules to form the way they did. I just cannot believe it was by chance.
The scientist can explain the cycle down to the finite details, but they cannot explain the "origin" of the cycle .. or, what caused it to come into existence. It is all theoretical.

So the understanding that something has "always" existed, no beginning, no end - has to be the answer (for me anyways).

reply to post by Annee


I have noticed that too. For instance, I was using the voice-to-text feature on my phone the other night and the phrase "serve him" came up. Now, had it been any other selection of words, it would be "him". But as soon as the words 'serve' and 'him' came together, the 'him' became 'Him'. My phone is a theistic piece of junk.

Nah, I kid. Best piece of cellular technology I have ever had the honor of owning. But still, you can see my point. There is a certain mentality that we have become conditioned to accept as a direct result of how we have been conditioned to see ourselves, and even our technology recognizes this.

reply to post by Annee

If I told someone that lacking hair is still having hair, or lacking a hobby is itself a hobby, they'd probably ask whether I've been feeling OK and might even suggest counseling.

atheism.about.com...

Written by...

Austin Cline has been actively involved in educating people about atheism, agnosticism, and secular humanism on the Internet for over 15 years.

You can also read more about Austin's current and past work on his Google Profile: Austin Cline.

Experience:

Austin Cline was a Regional Director for the Council for Secular Humanism and a former Publicity Coordinator for the Campus Freethought Alliance. Austin has also lectured on religion, religious violence, science, and skepticism.

Education:

Austin Cline holds a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Pennsylvania and a Master of Arts from Princeton University. He also studied for one year each at the University of Zurich and the Ludwig-Maximillian University in Munich, Germany. In America, Germany, and Switzerland, Austin has studied both religion and philosophy.

From Austin Cline:

Both atheism and agnosticism are neglected in popular culture, despite the popularity of recent books by atheists. When was the last time you saw an openly atheist politician, an article on atheism in a major periodical, or anyone discussing secular humanism as a serious alternative to religion?

Not exactly an impartial source.

Atheism seems more than a "lack of belief" to him doesn't? He's making a living being an atheist and idealist. Its his vocation! For having nothing to preach he sure has a lot to sell.

I like how he feels atheism and agnosticism is "neglected" in popular culture. How is atheism being neglected? Do those who "lack belief" in a tooth-fairy feel neglected when they lose a tooth and don't receive a dollar under the pillow?

Not much of an unbiased source for a definition though. That's like quoting a priest on the definition of Christianity. Like I said, any reputable and unbiased dictionary has the definition plain as day, directly refuting this "lack fo belief" nonsense for some reason pushed by most self-proclaimed atheists. There's no need to twist things so that they fit better with our dogmas.

reply to post by Annee

Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods." atheists.org...

There's no facts to back this up. You're taking it on faith from another atheist, like how a christian gets his definition of homosexuality from a priest. Faith.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Not exactly an impartial source.

What's a better source to define the philosophy of a group, than someone who knows that philosophy inside and out? Do you think a Christian is better qualified to define what it means to be an atheist than an atheist? Absurd!

reply to post by windword


The dictionary?

I thought atheists had no philosophy in common.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


The dictionary reflects the definition of the times in which it was written. The dictionaries used to define atheists a wicked too. Also, a "fag" was a cigarette, not any more. Mostly, our dictionaries were written by Christians.

reply to post by windword

The dictionary reflects the definition of the times in which it was written. The dictionaries used define atheists a wicked too. Also, a "fag" was a cigarette, not any more. Mostly, our dictionaries were written by Christians.

Alright lets see a fact to back that up.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

I thought atheists had no philosophy in common.

Whatever. It defies logic to assume a Christian definition of some line of thought that is considered evil, wicked, foolish and repugnant could be an accurate and fair description of what an atheist really is.

Best to go to the source for the unbiased truth.

reply to post by windword

Whatever. It defies logic to assume a Christian definition of some line of thought that is considered evil, wicked, foolish and repugnant could be an accurate and fair description of what an atheist really is.

Best to go to the source for the unbiased truth.

So all of the dictionaries are wrong? That defies logic.

reply to post by windword


Here some more logic:

All atheists "lack belief in deities",
A baby lack belief in deities,
therefore a baby is an atheist.

All atheists "lack belief in deities",
A dog lacks belief in deities,
therefore a dog is an atheist.

reply to post by windword



reply to post by LesMisanthrope

athe·ism
noun \ˈā-thē-ˌi-zəm\
Definition of ATHEISM
1
archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity

It seems Merriam-Webster (my personal go-to dictionary) acknowledges both the archaic and the modern understanding of the term.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Here some more logic:

All atheists "lack belief in deities",
A baby lack belief in deities,
therefore a baby is an atheist.

All atheists "lack belief in deities",
A dog lacks belief in deities,
therefore a dog is an atheist.

Yep. Atheism isn't exclusive. If you do not actively believe in a deity of any kind, you tend towards atheism. That's all there is to it.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by windword

 

Here some more logic:

All atheists "lack belief in deities",
A baby lack belief in deities,
therefore a baby is an atheist.

All atheists "lack belief in deities",
A dog lacks belief in deities,
therefore a dog is an atheist.

is that the same as:

all republicans lack a belief in communism
a baby lacks belief in communism
therefore a baby is a republican

all republicans lack a belief in communism
a dog lacks a belief in communism
therefore a dog is a republican

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. 2000.

atheist: One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods. atheism:
1a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

2. Godlessness; immorality.

1913 Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary atheist:
1. One who disbelieves or denies the existence of a God, or supreme intelligent Being.
2. A godless person. [Obs.] Syn. -- Infidel; unbeliever

Syn. -- Distrust; unbelief; incredulity; doubt; skepticism. -- Disbelief, Unbelief. Unbelief is a mere failure to admit; disbelief is a positive rejection. One may be an unbeliever in Christianity from ignorance or want of inquiry; a unbeliever has the proofs before him, and incurs the guilt of setting them aside. Unbelief is usually open to conviction; disbelief is already convinced as to the falsity of that which it rejects. Men often tell a story in such a manner that we regard everything they say with unbelief. Familiarity with the worst parts of human nature often leads us into a disbelief in many good qualities which really exist among men.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Yep. Atheism isn't exclusive. If you do not actively believe in a deity of any kind, you tend towards atheism. That's all there is to it.

Wouldn't an atheist have to know what a deity is before he can choose to believe in it or not? Babies also lack belief in the moon, the ocean, and anything outside of of their peripheral vision.

reply to post by windword


It's a thousands of years old word. I suppose one could erase its history if he felt so compelled to do, but usually its not that easy.