Lets take a look at what some have claimed to be a Phenomena and something toponder upon shall we? Lets take a look at Atheism in its true light. I will be as straight as an arrow while putting down my submissions on this issue. Looking at Atheism head on, how is it really?

You often meet them for the first time at secondary school. The typical teenage atheist is more likely a boy than a girl, stronger on science than the arts, and at the high-ish end of the academic spectrum. He tells you that he has studied the nature of matter, the universe etc, and can prove that God does not exist.

Already, you are plunged into the thick of the problem, which is one of category. The teenage thinker treats the existence of God as a scientific matter, but it isn’t. Science can certainly disprove some claims that believers make about God – or, to be more exact, it can prove that these claims are incompatible with science – but it can have nothing to say about something that lies outside its realm.

A few atheists realise this, and so, while trying to devise concepts of a good society without God, they give the subject of God's existence a wide berth. Charles Darwin followed this cautious approach. For the most part, however, they devote themselves to the wearisome and surprisingly difficult business of trying to prove a negative.

Who are atheists, and where did they come from?

Nick Spencer is research director of the (excellent) “religion and society think tank” Theos, and so he views the subject with a quiet Christian scepticism. But it is not his purpose to attack atheism. Instead, he wants to tell its history as it has developed, chiefly in Europe, in the past 500 years.

He points out that atheism often starts in disputes about authority. In a thoroughly Christian society – and indeed, in some Muslim societies today – rejection of God was seen as a threat to public order. Quite recently, a British judge said that the law of England has nothing to do with Christianity. He may wish that to be true, but, historically, it isn’t.


In his Commentaries on the Laws of England in the 18th century, William Blackstone argued that the oath in court was the necessary foundation for justice: “All moral evidence… all confidence in human veracity must be weakened by irreligion, and overthrown by infidelity.” An atheist was therefore not only mistaken, but failed in his duty as a citizen. Laws against the preaching of atheism resembled those against the preaching of racism today: it was thought intolerably injurious to society. What God had revealed, the state had a duty to uphold.

Gradually, “atheisms” – there was never a single form – advanced to challenge authority. Some arose from questioning Scripture (“a heap of Copie confusedly taken”, wrote one brave man at the end of the 16th century). Some, often stemming from priests who had seen appalling abuses themselves, concentrated on the wickedness of church power rather than on metaphysics.

Other non-believers, usually among the grandest in society, saw themselves as bathed in the light of reason. David Hume wrote of “the deepest Stupidity, Christianity and Ignorance”. Percy Bysshe Shelley linked atheism with intellectual superiority: “Let this horrid Galilean [Jesus] rule the Canaille [the rabble]… The reflecting part of the community… do not require his morality.” In the current era of Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism, many atheists call themselves the “Brights”, pleased to make the rest of us out as dullards.

Some atheists – Dawkins, Sigmund Freud, AJ Ayer – resemble, in essence, that clever young schoolboy. They believe they have brilliantly proved religion to be a load of hogwash. In their minds, it seems an advantage that their creed does not appeal as much to women or the poor and ignorant. Indeed, Friedrich Nietzsche saw more deeply how European society’s moral order would collapse with the destruction of faith – but welcomed it. Christianity was a “slave morality”, he said, celebrating weakness and preserving “too much of what should have perished”. People such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler took up such thoughts with deadly enthusiasm.

But precisely because religion, though theologically grounded, is much deeper than an intellectual theory, it tends to regenerate when attacked. The author quotes one Soviet persecutor of Christianity: “Religion is like a nail, the harder you hit, the deeper it goes in.” Spencer believes that the New Atheism is an expression of anger at the curious phenomenon that all over the world, except among white Westerners, God is back.

This leads to the question: “Is atheism parasitic on religion?” There is something unsatisfactory about building your thought around an anti-faith. Some atheists – amusingly, have noticed this, and set up Cults of Reason, secular societies and atheist chapels, trying, rather unsuccessfully, to reproduce the communal creativity of faith. Hamlet says: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” Any imaginative atheist must sometimes be troubled by this thought, and worry that his ideas are so dependent on the very thing he opposes.

It is as if someone were to devote his energies to telling people that they did not really love one another. He might be right, of course, but it would be a sad business. Love, indeed, is a subject that atheists find hard to discuss interestingly.

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/10934709/The-sad-business-of-trying-to-disprove-God.html

Ludwig Wittgenstein, the great philosopher, who understood religious belief throughout his life, mostly without quite sharing it, wrote: “Faith is faith in what is needed by my heart, my soul, not my speculative intelligence… Only love can believe the Resurrection.”

Me in the book store now getting this book. OP give it a read.

OP, before you defend a Cult, be sure to have investigated it before defending it. I can say you don't know what Christianity actually means other than what the man in the pulpit tells you every Sundays.

Please investigate and learn to question your beliefs before condemning others

Ayam not understanding this thread .What is a sad atheist i'm an atheist and am sad

naijadeyhia:
Lets take a look at what some have claimed to be a Phenomena and something toponder upon shall we? Lets take a look at Atheism in its true light. I will be as straight as an arrow while putting down my submissions on this issue. Looking at Atheism head on, how is it really?

You often meet them for the first time at secondary school. The typical teenage atheist is more likely a boy than a girl, stronger on science than the arts, and at the high-ish end of the academic spectrum. He tells you that he has studied the nature of matter, the universe etc, and can prove that God does not exist.

Already, you are plunged into the thick of the problem, which is one of category. The teenage thinker treats the existence of God as a scientific matter, but it isn’t. Science can certainly disprove some claims that believers make about God – or, to be more exact, it can prove that these claims are incompatible with science – but it can have nothing to say about something that lies outside its realm.

A few atheists realise this, and so, while trying to devise concepts of a good society without God, they give the subject of God's existence a wide berth. Charles Darwin followed this cautious approach. For the most part, however, they devote themselves to the wearisome and surprisingly difficult business of trying to prove a negative.

Who are atheists, and where did they come from?

Nick Spencer is research director of the (excellent) “religion and society think tank” Theos, and so he views the subject with a quiet Christian scepticism. But it is not his purpose to attack atheism. Instead, he wants to tell its history as it has developed, chiefly in Europe, in the past 500 years.

He points out that atheism often starts in disputes about authority. In a thoroughly Christian society – and indeed, in some Muslim societies today – rejection of God was seen as a threat to public order. Quite recently, a British judge said that the law of England has nothing to do with Christianity. He may wish that to be true, but, historically, it isn’t.


In his Commentaries on the Laws of England in the 18th century, William Blackstone argued that the oath in court was the necessary foundation for justice: “All moral evidence… all confidence in human veracity must be weakened by irreligion, and overthrown by infidelity.” An atheist was therefore not only mistaken, but failed in his duty as a citizen. Laws against the preaching of atheism resembled those against the preaching of racism today: it was thought intolerably injurious to society. What God had revealed, the state had a duty to uphold.

Gradually, “atheisms” – there was never a single form – advanced to challenge authority. Some arose from questioning Scripture (“a heap of Copie confusedly taken”, wrote one brave man at the end of the 16th century). Some, often stemming from priests who had seen appalling abuses themselves, concentrated on the wickedness of church power rather than on metaphysics.

Other non-believers, usually among the grandest in society, saw themselves as bathed in the light of reason. David Hume wrote of “the deepest Stupidity, Christianity and Ignorance”. Percy Bysshe Shelley linked atheism with intellectual superiority: “Let this horrid Galilean [Jesus] rule the Canaille [the rabble]… The reflecting part of the community… do not require his morality.” In the current era of Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism, many atheists call themselves the “Brights”, pleased to make the rest of us out as dullards.

Some atheists – Dawkins, Sigmund Freud, AJ Ayer – resemble, in essence, that clever young schoolboy. They believe they have brilliantly proved religion to be a load of hogwash. In their minds, it seems an advantage that their creed does not appeal as much to women or the poor and ignorant. Indeed, Friedrich Nietzsche saw more deeply how European society’s moral order would collapse with the destruction of faith – but welcomed it. Christianity was a “slave morality”, he said, celebrating weakness and preserving “too much of what should have perished”. People such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler took up such thoughts with deadly enthusiasm.

But precisely because religion, though theologically grounded, is much deeper than an intellectual theory, it tends to regenerate when attacked. The author quotes one Soviet persecutor of Christianity: “Religion is like a nail, the harder you hit, the deeper it goes in.” Spencer believes that the New Atheism is an expression of anger at the curious phenomenon that all over the world, except among white Westerners, God is back.

This leads to the question: “Is atheism parasitic on religion?” There is something unsatisfactory about building your thought around an anti-faith. Some atheists – amusingly, have noticed this, and set up Cults of Reason, secular societies and atheist chapels, trying, rather unsuccessfully, to reproduce the communal creativity of faith. Hamlet says: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” Any imaginative atheist must sometimes be troubled by this thought, and worry that his ideas are so dependent on the very thing he opposes.

It is as if someone were to devote his energies to telling people that they did not really love one another. He might be right, of course, but it would be a sad business. Love, indeed, is a subject that atheists find hard to discuss interestingly.

Ludwig Wittgenstein, the great philosopher, who understood religious belief throughout his life, mostly without quite sharing it, wrote: “Faith is faith in what is needed by my heart, my soul, not my speculative intelligence… Only love can believe the Resurrection.”

Be ingenious. Try to come up with original content, rather than plagiarizing antiquated write-ups from the internet.


http://www.realclearreligion.org/2014/07/01/the_sad_business_of_richard_dawkins_261437.html

ifenes:
Me in the book store now getting this book. OP give it a read.

Nice book.

ifenes:
Me in the book store now getting this book. OP give it a read.

Ahh they are filing out. Nahh i will pass on the offer. Been around long enough to hear about that conspiracy theory. Not all garbage is meant to be read you know.

GrizzlyBear:



Be ingenious. Try to come up with original content, rather than plagiarizing antiquated write-ups from the internet.

http://www.realclearreligion.org/2014/07/01/the_sad_business_of_richard_dawkins_261437.html

Did you think i was done and nope it wasnt from there. It was from here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/10934709/The-sad-business-of-trying-to-disprove-God.html

GrizzlyBear:



Be ingenious. Try to come up with original content, rather than plagiarizing antiquated write-ups from the internet.

Learn to reason independently and objectively. For once, allow your mind to be the primal lens with which you view your world. Learn to forge independent opinions about the nature of reality. Learn to critically examine ideas using your own unbiased intuition as the sole cognitive microscope. This is the only way to truly be free from the shackles of intellectual bondage.

Stop regurgitating other people's opinions.

http://www.realclearreligion.org/2014/07/01/the_sad_business_of_richard_dawkins_261437.html

Sigh i guess you missed my memo. I have been bored sfor a few days so I decided to entertain myself using atheism as my stimulus. In that light i would prefer to simply "regurgitate" especially when its in line with my line of reasoning and yeah i can be lazy like that when bored and frankly watching all of you hustle into defensive positions is quite humurous,

Would this be the ifenes who believes in voodoo and aliens? Is this the person who's taken it upon himself to speak on behalf of atheism? !?
If ifenes is an atheist, then TB Joshua is Albert Einstein!

I still don't understand why so-called christians always try so hard at making atheists appear evil.

I don't hate religion
I don't hate you
All I want is [size=15pt] Proof ! [/size]

Don't talk to me about scientists, talk to me about the god you believe in

Onechancearmy:
Would this be the ifenes who believes in voodoo and aliens? Is this the person who's taken it upon himself to speak on behalf of atheism? !?
If ifenes is an atheist, then TB Joshua is Albert Einstein!

He is the wierd kind who believes in himself and has his heaven inside of him and loves himself yet believes in all you just mentioned.

Someone dreamt he was having his testicles fondled and ifenes quickly said he must have had some alien babies so was probably being visited by aliens.

This is now the person recommending a book for me to read. LWTMB

Indeed i have seen and heard it all in this life

naijadeyhia:


Did you think i was done and nope it wasnt from there. It was from here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/10934709/The-sad-business-of-trying-to-disprove-God.html

Oh, I didn't know you weren't done, what took you so long? Was copying and pasting a link too difficult a task?

Is this the new argument now? Where you got the link from? Lol. Just copying a sentence from your post and pasting it in the google search box, returns various websites where your op was posted in. So, whether you got it from telegraph, or from the website on my link, doesn't actually matter. What matters is that you have a penchant for regurgitating old articles to argue against atheism, which also tells a lot about you - That you aren't someone who thinks for himself. That you allow others do your thinking for you, and then you sheepishly agree with their views. It reveals that you haven't developed the capacity to parse ideas without clinging tenaciously to the views of other people.

Learn to reason independently and objectively. For once, allow your mind to be the primal lens with which you perceive your world. Learn to forge independent opinions about the nature of reality. Learn to critically examine ideas using your own unbiased intuition as the sole cognitive microscope. This is the only way to truly be free from the shackles of intellectual bondage.

mrmrmister:

I still don't understand why so-called christians always try so hard at making atheists appear evil.

I don't hate religion
I don't hate you
All I want is [size=15pt] Proof ! [/size]

Don't talk to me about scientists, talk to me about the god you believe in

Do you believe God exists?

GrizzlyBear:


Oh, I didn't know you weren't done, what took you so long? Was copying and pasting a link too difficult a task?

Is this the new argument now? Where you got the link from? Lol. Just copying a sentence from your post and pasting it in the google search box, returns various websites where your op was posted in. So, whether you got it from telegraph, or from the website on my link, doesn't actually matter. What matters is that you have a penchant for regurgitating old articles to argue against religion, which also tells a lot about you - That you aren't someone who thinks for himself. That you allow others do your thinking for you, and then you sheepishly agree with their views. It reveals that you don't haven't developed the capacity to parse ideas without clinging tenaciously to the views of other people.

Learn to reason independently and objectively. For once, allow your mind to be the primal lens with which you view perceive your world. Learn to forge independent opinions about the nature of reality. Learn to critically examine ideas using your own unbiased intuition as the sole cognitive microscope. This is the only way to truly be free from the shackles of intellectual bondage.

scroll up and read about my boredom if you would. I can be lazy when i choose. Life is all about variety and frankly you guys deserve no brain energy from me these days so yeah scroll up

Onechancearmy:
Would this be the ifenes who believes in voodoo and aliens? Is this the person who's taken it upon himself to speak on behalf of atheism? !?
If ifenes is an atheist, then TB Joshua is Albert Einstein!

Some things are beyond you no doubt. You will notice I hardly comments on deluded posts like this as I now know I'm talking to level 1 pupils. Voodoo to you is devilish and magic, to me its normal and only hidden knowledge of human abilities and experiences.

If you will let me I will re-explain the bible to you and show you how it has got nothing to do with Christianity

GrizzlyBear:


Nice book. I'll purchase it immediately.

I actually bought it few mins ago. I posted it on snap chat and a friend wanted it.

naijadeyhia:


Do you believe God exists?

No!

mrmrmister:


No!

So how then do you possibly want to know from another person about what you do not believe exists and have mentally blocked out? How?

ifenes:


Some things are beyond you no doubt. You will notice I hardly comments on deluded posts like this as I now know I'm talking to level 1 pupils. Voodoo to you is devilish and magic, to me its normal and only hidden knowledge of human abilities and experiences.

If you will let me I will re-explain the bible to you and show you how it has got nothing to do with Christianity

Ifenes the knowledgeable. lol

So where is your proof for Alien life forms? So voodoo is only formerly hidden human abilities and knowledge now exposed, Finally something entertaining to probably lift my boredom with. So ifenes lets talk shall we?

ifenes:


Some things are beyond you no doubt. You will notice I hardly comments on deluded posts like this as I now know I'm talking to level 1 pupils. Voodoo to you is devilish and magic, to me its normal and only hidden knowledge of human abilities and experiences.

If you will let me I will re-explain the bible to you and show you how it has got nothing to do with Christianity

Voodoo to me is childish, primitive, prelogical and the surest stamp of ignorance you can find in a human being.
Kindly establish a link between voodoo and rationality otherwise YOU are the one who is a level 1 pupil.

Onechancearmy:


Voodoo to me is childish, primitive, prelogical and the surest stamp of ignorance you can find in a human being.
Kindly establish a link between voodoo and rationality otherwise YOU are the one who is a level 1 pupil.

Ouch!

naijadeyhia:


Ahh they are filing out. Nahh i will pass on the offer. Been around long enough to hear about that conspiracy theory. Not all garbage is meant to be read you know.

Doesn't the story of a son of a carpenter nailed to a cross for a sin a conspiracy theory? Have you ever wondered if a Jewish dude could die for you?

naijadeyhia:


So how then do you possibly want to know from another person about what you do not believe exists and have mentally blocked out? How?

How?
What do you mean how?
What is the best way to make someone believe than show proof?
The only way you can prove atheism wrong is by proving your religion right

ifenes:


Doesn't the story of a son of a carpenter nailed to a cross for a sin a conspiracy theory? Have you ever wondered if a Jewish dude could die for you?

Scroll up! I am open to discussing aliens and voodoo with you. At least lets dwell on something you are so sure of.

mrmrmister:


How?
What do you mean how?
What is the best way to make someone believe than show proof?

You didnt read where i stated a mental block did you? What proof can filter through that mental screen?

naijadeyhia:


You didnt read where i stated a mental block did you? What proof can filter through that mental screen?

Try first
Let's see what happens

Onechancearmy:


Voodoo to me is childish, primitive, prelogical and the surest stamp of ignorance you can find in a human being.
Kindly establish a link between voodoo and rationality otherwise YOU are the one who is a level 1 pupil.

Voodoo is the original form of alchemy. Voodoo is advance physics and those in the know use it without you knowing. The big politicians and media of Europe know theses stuff. The act of using the illusion of promises to get votes alone is an act of Voodoo( mind control). The media knows that if they keep feeding the audience a particular info repeatedly they will create a matrix of what they want.

Voodoo is all about mind control and manipulation of Energy. We are made up of Energy( I doubt you know that). And voodoo is only a name for the art of manipulating humans are are pure Energy

The grass root of illiterate voodoo priest in Africa are making voodoo look like it belongs to illustrates. The Library of Egypt was the most sort after because it contained ancient Voodoo( Al Kermit or Alchemy)

mrmrmister:

Try first
Let's see what happens

Nahh that would be shooting in the dark or punching the wind and honestly who has the time for that?


Satisfactory proof is always in the consciousness of he who seeks for one so he alone can satisfy his thirst for proof.

naijadeyhia:


scroll up and read about my boredom if you would. I can be lazy when i choose. Life is all about variety and frankly you guys deserve no brain energy from me these days so yeah scroll up

It doesn't take more brain energy to construct a write-up of below 500 words, than it does to spend almost the whole day trying to argue ignorantly with people who you claim do not deserve your so called brain energy which you use in arguing with them.

Stop making excuses for your intellectual laziness, piteous credulity and the banality of your views.