Evidence for God from Science

SML, I looked at your link and was very disappointed to see very few charities and plenty of self-promoting groups. There are indeed a few charities, which are secular; they are not atheist and their "fundamental principles" are taken from none other than Christianity. To take 3 such charities...

Secular Charities and Aid groups:

[1] American Red Cross

"Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement:

Humanity

The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, born of a desire to bring assistance without discrimination to the wounded on the battlefield endeavours, in its international and national capacity, to prevent and alleviate human suffering wherever it may be found. Its purpose is to protect life and health and to ensure respect for the human being. It promotes mutual understanding, friendship, cooperation and lasting peace among all peoples."

This is without doubt taken from the Christian ideal- Quakerism in particular, of the "Equal dignity of man."

[2] Now let's look at the "Union of Concerned Scientists" and take a look at their, erm, "accomplishments" ...

"Since 1969, the Union of Concerned Scientists has brought together the knowledge and influence of the scientific community with the passion of concerned citizens to work for a healthy environment and a safer world. Here are just some of our key accomplishments:

-In response to an unprecedented level of political interference in science, UCS challenges the distortion and suppression of research at a variety of federal agencies and federal science advisory committees on subjects ranging from air pollution and global warming to reproductive health and military intelligence. Working with members of Congress, UCS succeeds in getting landmark scientific integrity legislation introduced in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

-UCS publishes a series of groundbreaking regional analyses of the effects of global warming. These reports mobilize local activists across the country by illustrating the risks of dangerous climate change in the Gulf States, the Great Lakes region, California, and the Northeast United States.

-Thanks to an intensive campaign by UCS activists—as well as an influential report by UCS scientists detailing how global warming will impact California—the nation's most populous state adopts landmark legislation to curb global warming, setting a valuable precedent for other states and the federal government.

-UCS climate experts play a key role in crafting the first multi-state effort to combat global warming. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) draft regulations issued by seven Northeast states will cap heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions in a region that accounts for six percent of the world's global warming pollution."

Hmm. It seems to be a political outfit, to say the least. "Global warming" is the key theme here. Is this a charity? Well, the link seems to think so, but if you call "spreading the gospel of the global warmers" a charity then perhaps it is...

[3] Now to the America Civil Liberties Union [ACLU] Their 2nd fundamental principle?

"Your right to equal protection under the law - protection against unlawful discrimination."

Again, we are back at the Equal dignity of man.

The rest of the page on that link deals with these 3 headings:

1 Issue-Specific Secularist Organisations

2 Church/state separation and secularist organizations

3 Organizations that promote humanism/Atheism

None of these are charitable organisations; they are self-interest groups. Mr. Dawkins is even in there, promoting science and "reason." I mean, you couldn't make this up! Hey SML, there are many atheists who do much good. Of this I have no doubt. But atheism alone has no principles to underline its "charity" that have not already been established by religion. Atheism has no morality; atheists however do have a sense of morality, drawn from religion and specifically Christianity. That link was three-quarters organisations promoting themselves.

Dan

Gman wrote:

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:I honestly see no real difference. Atheism is not a religion. It is not a group. We do not have meetings. Why is it always assumed that atheists don't give? We just don't stand on the mountaintop and makes sure everyone knows. The point of a secular charities is so that people, like atheists do not feel like they are donating to a missionary. We do not have a flag as far as I am aware.

I disagree. Atheism is most certainly a religion.. Although it is not a supernatural one. If you deny the authority of God, that He created all things, you haven't denied the concept of authority, you simply transfer it to something else like nature or mother nature, etc... Everything becomes self generated. History becomes our invention, morality becomes our invention, knowledge becomes our invention. You just transfer your authority to your own knowledge, your own experiences, etc..

Milton Yinger, who wrote The Scientific Study of Religion, stated that religion "can be defined as a system of beliefs and practices by means of which a group of people struggles with these ultimate problems of human life." Some people deal with it by shopping or playing golf. Man is ultimately concerned about his ultimate destiny.

Anything that is seeking to probe or give answers to that question is considered a religious confession. Not just simply to those who have an outward form of worship. Everyone is capable of being religious in that sense.

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:As for your second post. You know very well what an atheists will say to that. How on earth can I disprove something that does not exist.

That's right, you can't disprove that God doesn't exist. That is why I'm waiting for an answer.. Growing cobwebs here actually..

And you can't prove God does exist. so whats your point? I better check if I have paid my atheist dues. I have never even been to a meeting.

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:And you can't prove God does exist. so whats your point? I better check if I have paid my atheist dues. I have never even been to a meeting.

The point being is that you have no reasoning for being an atheist other than for personal reasons.... Also I can prove that there is a God in a sense that you can't prove abiogenesis. It has never been witnessed. Theorized, yes. Witnessed, no...

DannyM wrote:SML, I looked at your link and was very disappointed to see very few charities and plenty of self-promoting groups. There are indeed a few charities, which are secular; they are not atheist and their "fundamental principles" are taken from none other than Christianity. To take 3 such charities...

Secular Charities and Aid groups:

[1] American Red Cross

"Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement:

Humanity

The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, born of a desire to bring assistance without discrimination to the wounded on the battlefield endeavours, in its international and national capacity, to prevent and alleviate human suffering wherever it may be found. Its purpose is to protect life and health and to ensure respect for the human being. It promotes mutual understanding, friendship, cooperation and lasting peace among all peoples."

This is without doubt taken from the Christian ideal- Quakerism in particular, of the "Equal dignity of man."

[2] Now let's look at the "Union of Concerned Scientists" and take a look at their, erm, "accomplishments" ...

"Since 1969, the Union of Concerned Scientists has brought together the knowledge and influence of the scientific community with the passion of concerned citizens to work for a healthy environment and a safer world. Here are just some of our key accomplishments:

-In response to an unprecedented level of political interference in science, UCS challenges the distortion and suppression of research at a variety of federal agencies and federal science advisory committees on subjects ranging from air pollution and global warming to reproductive health and military intelligence. Working with members of Congress, UCS succeeds in getting landmark scientific integrity legislation introduced in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

-UCS publishes a series of groundbreaking regional analyses of the effects of global warming. These reports mobilize local activists across the country by illustrating the risks of dangerous climate change in the Gulf States, the Great Lakes region, California, and the Northeast United States.

-Thanks to an intensive campaign by UCS activists—as well as an influential report by UCS scientists detailing how global warming will impact California—the nation's most populous state adopts landmark legislation to curb global warming, setting a valuable precedent for other states and the federal government.

-UCS climate experts play a key role in crafting the first multi-state effort to combat global warming. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) draft regulations issued by seven Northeast states will cap heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions in a region that accounts for six percent of the world's global warming pollution."

Hmm. It seems to be a political outfit, to say the least. "Global warming" is the key theme here. Is this a charity? Well, the link seems to think so, but if you call "spreading the gospel of the global warmers" a charity then perhaps it is...

[3] Now to the America Civil Liberties Union [ACLU] Their 2nd fundamental principle?

"Your right to equal protection under the law - protection against unlawful discrimination."

Again, we are back at the Equal dignity of man.

The rest of the page on that link deals with these 3 headings:

1 Issue-Specific Secularist Organisations

2 Church/state separation and secularist organizations

3 Organizations that promote humanism/Atheism

None of these are charitable organisations; they are self-interest groups. Mr. Dawkins is even in there, promoting science and "reason." I mean, you couldn't make this up! Hey SML, there are many atheists who do much good. Of this I have no doubt. But atheism alone has no principles to underline its "charity" that have not already been established by religion. Atheism has no morality; atheists however do have a sense of morality, drawn from religion and specifically Christianity. That link was three-quarters organisations promoting themselves.

Dan

We have already discussed that there aren't many and the reasons why.
But here are a few I have found. Keep in mind I am not an expert in atheist charities. -SML

Atheist Centre of India
The Atheist Centre was founded in 1940 by the Gora family, who were associated with Ghandi and the nationalist movement for freedom. They provide counseling, are fighting against the caste system and for the abolition of child marriages, helping ex-prostitutes, and protecting widows from inhumane customs. They also dispell superstitions by scientific demonstrations, and are asked to calm witchcraft hysterias. They provide sex education and family planning, are carrying on a rural development program, and have a center for free cornea grafting operations which is giving sight to the blind.

Atheist Charity
This is a new, small charity run by atheist volunteers. They currently give money to other charities for the poor, are involved in forming a non-discriminatory alternative to the Boy Scouts, and later will start natural disaster relief projects.

EARTHWARD, Inc.
Earth's Atheist Resistance To Holy Wars And Religious Devastation gives humanitarian aid to victims of religiously motivated violence.
http://earthward.net/

Humanitas
Dutch organization for social care an community development, based upon humanistic principles with projects in the fields of child-care, elderly homes, support for the homeless, care for the disabled, visiting and empowering the lonely, and grief counseling.
http://www.humanitas.nl/

Gman wrote:

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:And you can't prove God does exist. so whats your point? I better check if I have paid my atheist dues. I have never even been to a meeting.

The point being is that you have no reasoning for being an atheist other than for personal reasons.... Also I can prove that there is a God in a sense that you can't prove abiogenesis. It has never been witnessed. Theorized, yes. Witnessed, no...

The same can be said for God. No matter what either of us say we will both be blowing wind when it comes to proving God.

SweetMonkeyLove wrote: The same can be said for God. No matter what either of us say we will both be blowing wind when it comes to proving God.

Like I said.. I can in a sense that you can't create life from inorganic matter.

Just because a theory is discredited? There are and will be other theorys.

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:Just because a theory is discredited? There are and will be other theorys.

Oh it's still out there but under a different name of course.. Nonetheless, you only have a belief about it. Nothing concrete. Just like atheism...

Gman wrote:

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:Just because a theory is discredited? There are and will be other theorys.

Oh it's still out there but under a different name of course.. Nonetheless, you only have belief about it. Nothing concrete. Just like atheism...

hahahah you crack me up. My lazy day is almost done. I enjoy the converstions here so far. ty all. I will be back however I have a business to run and a family to enjoy. Usually I get some time on sunday for this sort of thing. Looking foreward. Try not to filet me too hard while I am gone. Not because I am worried about it but because I cannot for the life of me figure how to use that quote option properly and responding to long posts is both difficult and confusing LOL Peace all. - SML

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:

Gman wrote:

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:Just because a theory is discredited? There are and will be other theorys.

Oh it's still out there but under a different name of course.. Nonetheless, you only have belief about it. Nothing concrete. Just like atheism...

hahahah you crack me up. My lazy day is almost done. I enjoy the converstions here so far. ty all. I will be back however I have a business to run and a family to enjoy. Usually I get some time on sunday for this sort of thing. Looking foreward. Try not to filet me too hard while I am gone. Not because I am worried about it but because I cannot for the life of me figure how to use that quote option properly and responding to long posts is both difficult and confusing LOL Peace all. - SML

Ok no problemo. You just have to put them in the quotes. Like this {quote="SweetMonkeyLove"}Put your statement here.{/quote} Except where there is a { } make it [ ].

SweetMonkeyLove wrote:We have already discussed that there aren't many and the reasons why.
But here are a few I have found. Keep in mind I am not an expert in atheist charities. -SML

Atheist Centre of India
The Atheist Centre was founded in 1940 by the Gora family, who were associated with Ghandi and the nationalist movement for freedom. They provide counseling, are fighting against the caste system and for the abolition of child marriages, helping ex-prostitutes, and protecting widows from inhumane customs. They also dispell superstitions by scientific demonstrations, and are asked to calm witchcraft hysterias. They provide sex education and family planning, are carrying on a rural development program, and have a center for free cornea grafting operations which is giving sight to the blind.

Atheist Charity
This is a new, small charity run by atheist volunteers. They currently give money to other charities for the poor, are involved in forming a non-discriminatory alternative to the Boy Scouts, and later will start natural disaster relief projects.

EARTHWARD, Inc.
Earth's Atheist Resistance To Holy Wars And Religious Devastation gives humanitarian aid to victims of religiously motivated violence.
http://earthward.net/

Humanitas
Dutch organization for social care an community development, based upon humanistic principles with projects in the fields of child-care, elderly homes, support for the homeless, care for the disabled, visiting and empowering the lonely, and grief counseling.
http://www.humanitas.nl/

Like I said, I'm sure atheists have charities, but the "concern" coming from the atheists does not come from *atheism*.

SweetMonkeyLove wrote: Turn on your tv and see some of the evangelists. Harsh. You can always expect a backlash when you label people heathens etc.

Turn on your tv and what you'll mainly see is a bunch of hypocrites and money scammers.

Again they do wish to debunk the bible. I do not disagree.

Do you wish to debunk the bible?

If you insist on wording your question in such a manner that I can only respond 'I hate the concept Of God' Then so be it.

It was an open ended question. You could have said "I do not hate the concept of God." I didn't coerce your reply.

I do not hate God.

You just hate the concept of Him, so if He does exist then you would automatically hate Him?

I hate the idea that my entire life is prewritten.

This is a Calvinistic concept, not mine. Can you demonstrate this doctrine in the bible. Be mindful that Christianity is a paradox.

I hate that we as a species are so arrogant that we think the universe was made for us alone.

The bible makes this claim (well not specifically that I know of), like it also claims the universe had a beginning, that time had a beginning and that the universe will eventually burn out. I wouldn't consider any of these claims to be arrogant, just factual.

If that is how you feel what is the point of discussion?

I didn't mean it quite that way, I guess my response was a little to vague. We have completely opposing viewpoints, yes, but if what I believe is correct than we will be separated as separated can be. It's not like I can even get a visitors pass, it;s final. I don't mind discussing this here at Evidence for God, but I gave up on atheist web sites.

hatsoff wrote:

Fürstentum Liechtenstein wrote:Here are some questions for you:

-Is Jesus an historical figure?

Of course. Near as I can figure, he was a Jewish apocalypticist who came out of the movement of John the Baptist with his own following.

How did that happen?

I simply came to face the fact that there is woefully insufficient evidence for the central claims of Christianity (e.g. the Resurrection). This happened very gradually, over several years, and privately.

Well, I'm glad you are not one of those who think Jesus was a myth. There seem to be atheists coming out of the baseboards around here, so for the benefit of those who think Jesus was cooked up by scheming apostles, here is what I found in my own books:


At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his diciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his diciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.
-Flavius Josephus, Antiquities XVIII, 63*

...Convening the judges of the Sanhedrin, he brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ and certain others. He accused them of transgressing the Law and condemned them to be stoned to death. Antiquities, XX, 197*

...Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hand of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischieveous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful find their centre and become popular. -Tacitus, The Annals, Book XV, 44.

Tacitus goes on to describe how the Chistians were torn apart by animals for the benefit of spectators...I'll spare you the details.

I'll get to regeneration tomorrow.

FL

*taken from Josephus, The Essential Writings, a condensation of Antiquities and The Jewish War.

I have been looking at this board and what you said both angers and disappoints me. You mention either thiests or athiests, but fail to mention those few who believe there could be a god or God. In the case of these people (myself included) neither term athiest or thiest applies. The reason this angers/disappoints me is that to discuss thieism and athiesim without including the group in between would be a lacking discusion. Hope I helped stimulate the talk .

read688 wrote:I have been looking at this board and what you said both angers and disappoints me. You mention either thiests or athiests, but fail to mention those few who believe there could be a god or God. In the case of these people (myself included) neither term athiest or thiest applies. The reason this angers/disappoints me is that to discuss thieism and athiesim without including the group in between would be a lacking discusion. Hope I helped stimulate the talk .

Huh? Those «few who believe there could be a god or God» are theists. Those who say there is no supernatural realm are atheists. Those who don't know are agnostics.

From a biblical perspective, there are only believers in the God of the Bible, and non-believers in Him.

FL