My religion believes is something akin to the Big Bang and the Big Bang (for which there is proof) itself is a Christian idea. Not all religions are as you say and most religious creation stories are more about culture than the universe.
Why do atheists believe in magic?
- Thread starter pingpong12
- Start date
My religion believes is something akin to the Big Bang and the Big Bang (for which there is proof) itself is a Christian idea. Not all religions are as you say and most religious creation stories are more about culture than the universe.
The Big Bang theory eliminates the genesis story possibility and the Theory of Evolution does the same. Thus I feel one cannot logically believe the Biblical version and the science based at the same time. It's akin to accepting the Ether and Electricity as equally valid explanations for my computer functioning.
The Big Bang did not "create" the universe "out of nothing".
The Singularity existed prior to the BB and that was comprised of all matter/energy in the universe. The origin of the Singularity is still open to scientific discovery and the cyclical model of the universe makes a lot of sense to me since it follows the laws of physics.
Nowhere in Christianity is there anything at all about the Singularity. However Christianity is filled with "magic" of all kinds that it's adherents believe in.
The OP heading is fallacious because it is not atheists who "believe in magic".
Instead atheists understand that science is a means of understanding the universe and it is self correcting while religions are stuck in the dogma of what is considered to be the "inerrant word of god" and have to deal with the cognitive dissonance between what they are told to believe versus the expanding knowledge base of science.
Any and all stipulation as to the creation of our universe is just that...stipulation. The big Bang and scientific exploration/examination allow for and accept the limitations and expected changes to our understanding whereas the religious hypothesis does not and in fact must inherently forbid it to remain viable.
Basically religions force limitations while science destroys them.
Basically religions force limitations while science destroys them.
Last edited:
Atheists are not beholden to believe the inane myths and silly superstitions of religions that originated in the stone age and were codified in the bronze age.
FTR atheism has been around as long as recorded history and predates religions since everyone is born an atheist.
Basic understanding of reality eliminates the Genesis story. Only morons believe that was an actual account. The BBT does nothing to disprove it. Nor does evolution. Genesis is preposterous thus it was never proven to begin with.
Wow your special group is better than the other special groups and...
wow, your special group has been around longer than all the other special groups!
How special for you.
Last edited:
It is patently obvious that you have your own "special definition" of what defines a "special group".
Since it comes across as flamebaiting it will be ignored.
Have a nice day!
Last edited:
I'm just reflecting what you are saying. read what you said (in quotes above what I said) and see if what I said is inaccurate. It seems you want acknowledgement for belonging to this special group and when I give you acknowledgement for your membership, you're getting all coquettish on me.
Last edited:
People aren't born atheist. Religion would never have been a thing and children wouldn't buy into the Easter bunny and the like so easily. What people aren't born into is a praticuler religion, humans are naturally spiritual but not sectarian.
What is deemed to be "human spirituality" exists in other mammals too but none of them have religions. Scientific studies have determined that what religions call "spirituality" is actually nothing more than a deep meditative state of mind.
Religion is an invention of man to control others and it chose to pervert "spirituality" as a means of exercising that control.
Simply because people, and animals, have the capacity for meditation is not proof that religions have any validity whatsoever. Achieving a meditative mental state does not put one in touch with any fictional deities.
If people are not born atheists when what "universal" nonsectarian religion are they born with?
The fact is that children have to be indoctrinated into believing in a religion because no one is born with the knowledge of any deities.
But that's not the same as atheism. Everyone knows who god is when born, their literal creator is overwhelmingly looming over them at birth.
This reminds me of a NatGeo article I read a few years back. The reporter met with a hunter gather group without religion (and not becuase of any inherent atheism, an equally alien concept to them). The reporter asked them if they had a god and after explaining the concept the interpreter pointed at the sun.
The point is as I stated before: Humans aren't atheists, we simply have no firm opinions on the subject until life experience forms them. If atheism was the natural state, religion would never have taken root. Instead early civilizations are full of examples of nature and family worship and later more recognizable religions that reflected to social hierarchy of the given society. Your atheism is no less a learned thing than my religion.
deanhill, et al,
When one invokes "atheism." one implies that their is a Supreme Being (SB) or Ultimate Cosmic Creator (UCC). When one suggests that there is a mystical and magical quality to the Big Bang Theory (or similar hypothesis), again in the background the latent connection to a SB or UCC is that one caused the other.
The Question on the Existence of the SB/UCC and the Beginning of the Universe initiates a cascade series of events that bring us forward to contemporary man.
There are to key issues (as used here) that must be kept in mind in discussions such as this:
• There is no universally accepted set of characteristic associated with the SB/UCC.
• Faith is a firm belief in a divinity for which there is no proof; but invokes a strong and powerful conviction.
• Science is based on observable empirical evidence as the basis of that understanding
Faith requires a strong and powerful conviction; whereas Science requires observable empirical evidence.
(SIDEBAR IMPLICATIONS) The the thumbnail Generalization
Ancient Greeks believed that the universe was immutable; that no UCC that formed the universe. The universe was un-created. The Ancient Greeks believed that the SB (multiple divinities) were responsible for bringing order to the Universe, but did not create the universe (it was always there).
The more Ancient Hebrew philosophers held that the Universe did not always exist, but was a creation of the UCC/SB (a single divinity).
The discussion is over the reduced argument:
• If the Universe began (suddenly appeared where nothing existed before) to exist, the the has a cause of its beginning.
§ Can something be created out of nothing?
§ What is "nothing?"
There must be some very difficult questions that must be examined before, in science, the the divine can be ruled-out.
Most Respectfully,
R
When one invokes "atheism." one implies that their is a Supreme Being (SB) or Ultimate Cosmic Creator (UCC). When one suggests that there is a mystical and magical quality to the Big Bang Theory (or similar hypothesis), again in the background the latent connection to a SB or UCC is that one caused the other.
The Question on the Existence of the SB/UCC and the Beginning of the Universe initiates a cascade series of events that bring us forward to contemporary man.
(COMMENT)I don't think they would believe that the universe just magically appeared. There would have to be scientific evidence for the "magic"
There are to key issues (as used here) that must be kept in mind in discussions such as this:
• There is no universally accepted set of characteristic associated with the SB/UCC.
• Faith is a firm belief in a divinity for which there is no proof; but invokes a strong and powerful conviction.
• Science is based on observable empirical evidence as the basis of that understanding
Faith requires a strong and powerful conviction; whereas Science requires observable empirical evidence.
(SIDEBAR IMPLICATIONS) The the thumbnail Generalization
Ancient Greeks believed that the universe was immutable; that no UCC that formed the universe. The universe was un-created. The Ancient Greeks believed that the SB (multiple divinities) were responsible for bringing order to the Universe, but did not create the universe (it was always there).
The more Ancient Hebrew philosophers held that the Universe did not always exist, but was a creation of the UCC/SB (a single divinity).
The discussion is over the reduced argument:
• If the Universe began (suddenly appeared where nothing existed before) to exist, the the has a cause of its beginning.
§ Can something be created out of nothing?
§ What is "nothing?"
There must be some very difficult questions that must be examined before, in science, the the divine can be ruled-out.
Most Respectfully,
R
Those of minimal intelligence would know or at a minimum be capable of looking it up.
"From Latin, abbreviation of et (“and”) and alii (“others”) (English: et alii) and its ... However, in lists of authors of a published work, et al. is still regularly used."
It IS answered but as suggested you lack the intellect required to comprehend the answer.
That seems mean-spirited and unnecessary.
He didn't say "what does 'et al' mean."
He did say "why do you keep saying it"
I know Aufgablassen personally and can attest that he is actually quite intelligent.
It seems very clear to me at least that stating tecoyah et al indicates tecoyah and others. If by chance my explaining that NOT being able to understand this is an insult I suggest getting testicle seeds and attempting to grow them.
Similar threads
