coffeesippin

Then why do many Catholics including people I have coffee with often at a cafe go to church tonight for mass? Saturday is, as you know, certainly not Sunday. I've never been Catholic, attended mass with friends twice, but I'm not Protestant either. Have you always believed in Non Locality? Where you ever aligned with those who considered Non Locality supernatural, pseudo science, myth, etc? If so, when did you stop believing in Non Locality as supernatural? Discovering Non Locality was real was a real revolution in scientific thought, and very recent. Five years ago it was still considered supernatural by many who think themselves scientific.

You did not read the meanings of the word preaching, Studiot. I'll include one of the meanings again: earnestly advocate (a belief or course of action). "my parents have always preached toleration and moderation" synonyms: advocate, recommend, advise, urge, teach, counsel "they preach toleration" In earnestly advocating your belief in science you are preaching. You are preaching your belief in science, not anyone else's but your own, and you are earnestly advocating it, and are therefore preaching. THAT is the link.

"I don't belief in gods (yours or anyone else's) there for atheism is not dead." My God is God .. there are no others. So, are you professing you belief in God?

"Not sure if one can believe what you say, particularly as you have given no reputable references," And what references have YOU given, Beecee, to your claims of Christians lying through their teeth which is quite a statement indeed, of not going to church on Sunday (which is not a commandment by the way rather all believers of all faiths are encouraged to get together for their own enjoyment and benefit with certain days sometimes being offered as good times to enjoy their own company) what is the substantiation of anything you say for instance, that you follow observations rejecting the paranormal and supernatural .. so you reject the reality of non-locality which has been demonstrated clearly, a non-locality that Einstein called 'Spooky,' or is 'Spooky' not supernatural and paranormal enough for you? Those who profess science proves there is no God are preaching, Studiot, according to the meaning of the word preaching. publicly proclaim or teach (a religious message or belief). "a church that preaches the good news" synonyms: proclaim, teach, spread, propagate, expound "he preached the gospel to them" earnestly advocate (a belief or course of action). "my parents have always preached toleration and moderation" synonyms: advocate, recommend, advise, urge, teach, counsel "they preach toleration"

My conversion had nothing to do with childhood upbringing except that I had respect for law and the right of others' existence. Who are you to say bringing up a child in a moral way like Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Confucius, etc is abuse of immature minds. I am certain ALL of those belief systems let the child know they cannot stand behind their parents skirts or trousers, but must find God or truth on their own, that their upbringing is a first step in that process. Now you may say 'Oh those idiot Born Againers' but that's what Christianity teaches .. that being born to parents is a first step .. that a person must be born of God. Yes I know T.V. makes a mockery of God and Born Againers, but you have to get beyond T.V. Mack. You're the one who brings it up .. you said you believe in verifiables .. you start the thread. I'll jump in. Amen! I suggested closing the thread because Strange answered the question by saying he does not believe in God .. but he suggested the thread would continue. The preaching arises because the question concerns God. The discussion on BB arises from people saying science proves there IS no God, which isn't the question, but whether Atheism is dead. Yes, wandering widely indeed, but seemingly all connected and logical. However, as the answer HAS been answered, Atheism is NOT dead, why not close the topic and open topics for question raised in the topic. Phew.

Verifiable? Like the Big Bang, Black Holes, Dark Matter? Those are ideas still under examination necessary for lack of evidence. Do you believe in Black Holes or Black Stars or another variation? Dark Matter or Modified Gravity? Big Bang or cosmic seeding of quantum fluctuation? Outside of Consensus every idea is idiotic to the Consensus.

The beginning and the end has been written, there will be no revisions. But God was never cruel, he was merely a judge with authority and responsibility. 'And God said to Noah, the earth was filled with violence through man ... and I will destroy them.' Drowning is far more merciful than the firebombings carried out for the sake of the English speaking empires in WW2 which were not judgments of God but greed of man. (Put up thy sword.) If you want cruelty, just look at the U.S. news concerning maniacs with guns.

8% of atheists cannot believe in God because atheism is the disbelief in God .. so 2%of atheists cannot be certain that God exists. a·the·ist /ˈāTHēəst/ noun a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods. You are right though that scientific method has no general relationship with the rejection of God because I am a person who believes that science not only shows the existence of God but proves, for instance, that the beginning and the end of this universe are as described in the bible.

Those things are not the topic of discussion. the death of Atheism is the topic. And you are wrong in your statement, religions are flourishing, whether that is good or bad is another question and would take months of discussion. Some of those old established denominations are approaching death, but that is not religion in general. Mythical beliefs have nothing to do with Atheism except truths to a believer are called myths by the unbeliever. If you fear eternal damnation, believe in Jesus, for he died for not only your sins but the sins of the whole world, as those old books in the bible say.

Amen!

Mack .. the topic we are discussing is Is Atheism Dead. Are you going to discuss or simply hurl accusations of dishonesty? A factual basis for Is Atheism Dead can be presented by one person saying, "I do not believe in God." That would prove that Atheism is NOT dead, and would be the end of the discussion. Perhaps you would like to say you do not believe in God, and so Atheism is not dead, and suggest the moderator close the topic? To keep Elmer Fudd and his shotgun away?

Eternal damnation is done away with by the scripture I included here .. "... saviour of all men, especially of those who believe." All science is speculation. "Man will never fly .. man will never walk on the moon." Those were solid affirmations of 'truth' by respectable scientists. But lunatics like Jules Verne were not trying to destroy their foundation of belief .. only build on a foundation of science. Yes, Inflation, sorry, my aging memory and all that. Last word. I hope you're on your knees giving thanks.

The Expansion I referred to was the period of rapid expansion inserted into the original theory after measurements showed the universe was larger than it should have been, which is why I added the capital 'E' to Expansion (at least I hope I did.) Yes, the universe appears to be expanding, and at an increasing rate which in one scenario leads to The Big Rip described in the book of Peter, with the 'elements flying apart' the atomic structure itself exploding as the Rip says it will. Regarding the Big Bang, if you put a little gasoline on water, you will also see that kind of expansion, with no explosion of Big Bang. I see that as a possibility after a seeding of quantum fluctuation. But we are straying from the topic, I hope forgiveness rules the mods. Your pride tells you that you know so much that the other ideas are silly.

I'm disappointed at that statement, Strange. I hoped you were beyond that kind of pride.

Most lies, in my experience, come from fear or desire for gain. I have nothing to fear here, nothing to gain.

These two were completely isolated. I had been watching the sky for quite a while, lying on my back in my sleeping bag. I watched the sky for quite a while after. It was not a shower, and of course I've seen showers. They were also very large, and you know how rare they are. But of course you have only my word for these things. A word from which I have nothing to gain.

I wasn't attempting to interject scientific discussion, only to clarify my position in this discussion, that my belief in God is not because of an unbelief in science. All of the sciences though, in my knowledge, act as evidence for God, and increase my fascination with science, and my desire to explore science increases. An honest and flatly stated opinion. But what would be the benefit to me of making such lies, unless I wanted to be seen as a liar and a crackpot? I'm not paid to preach God. I'm 71 years old having no need of income other than my Seniors' pension which did not come from preaching God. Why, Mistermack, do you think I would tell such a whopper .. a tale that would require a far greater imagination than I have seen in almost any tale of fictional adventure.

I believe in pure science that seeks answers rather than false science which claims to have the answer, I have believe in that science since my childhood microscope and the nickname given to be by my friends Sputnick because of my interest what I now call cosmology. I have only stopped denying God's existence since riding atop a pile of lumber on a freight train through the Rocky Mountains on a cloudless night at or near midnight 41 years ago when I asked, "God, if you're real and you're up there give me a sign.' And a cosmological sign, a huge meteorite flashed across the sky, and my heart and mind changed to belief. About 20 minutes later though doubt entered, and I asked, "God, if you're real, and you're up there, do it again." I asked for the exact same sign, knowing the mathematical improbability of that sign. It seemed the SAME meteorite flashed across the sky, the same brightness, the same length of travel. Now I know that God CAN do that by an act of creation, or because scripture says he can guide our thoughts, he could have caused me to ask for that same sign, with the meteorite on its way in his good time. It's not important to me which method he used. The evidence for Big Bang became immediately so tenuous that a fabrication had to be thrown in .. Expansion, the only evidence for Expansion being the need for it. For evidence of God you can read my post on my freight train hopping, and suspect I'm either fabricating, which I'm not, or had experienced coincidence, but you will have to admit the coincidence was mathematically challenged.

A biblical example .. "And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief."

Reaction to the comments "I don't believe something" or "I disbelieve something" is much more important than the statement. If someone says, "I don't believe in the Big Bang," and he is cast out as intellectually limited and not worthy of consideration, then those casting him out are condemning themselves to disbelief in the possibility that perhaps there WAS no big bang. Same with someone saying, "I don't believe in God" or for that matter "I believe in God." Perhaps the person saying "I believe in God" is deceived, and the person who says, "I don't believe in God" is deceived, perhaps the latter person DOES believe in God but isn't intellectually aware of God, but DOES believe in love, which is what God is. That short statement could open up a few days or years discussion among bible believers and disbelievers .. not all critical or condemning of your statement. However, that discussion would take away from the topic 'is atheism dead.'

The old testament is for those who are under the law with its curses on lawbreakers. The new says "He who is without sin cast the first stone."

If thou judgest thyself to be such a fortunate man that pride does not blind you you must be a happy man, I hope your judgement is true. "Eye for eye" was under the Mosaic law, and men were so violent in that day that that same law also commanded them to no longer eat raw meat, but to cook it first. The new law which came after man had been somewhat open to non violence through the law (for penalty under law does inhibit violence) is the law of the spirit of love which says, "For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." 1 Timothy 4:10 That same Spirit in that same book says, "Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." Mathew 26:54 It's no wonder so many people DON'T believe in God, with so many in imperialist pulpits preaching for war (resulting in the promotion of their own personal imperial empire.)

At this time I'll consider that a compliment, though at other times I'd consider it an insult, but as I mature I have to see the people at formal government approved pulpits as mere imperfect humans. I consider myself ordained by belief in God who is love, and the Word in the KJV to have a duty and pleasure to preach, but my ordination is not of man, and pulling the pin on a grenade is something I preach against.

I included that person in my statement that it is whether or not we bow down and worship pride or not that either blinds our minds or enables us to think freely.

A person may say, "I do not believe in God." That same person is not saying, "I will never believe in God." Stephen Hawking seems to have necessitated for himself his own formal unbelief in God, and therefore of judgement, when he rejected his wife, who had so lovingly and continuously dedicated herself to him that she not only saved his life, but enabled him to become the scientist he was. It's sad that he formally restated that position shortly before he passed on to meet him. Oh well, surprises happen. And God is merciful.