Archive for the ‘Atheism unreasonable’ Category

Atheism is neither supported by “Scientific Method” nor by Science

May 7, 2021

Atheism people give the impression that they are supported by Science and they demand of the Religions to give “Evidence” of God in terms of the “Scientific Method”. Their demand is unreasonable. Paarsurrey gives here some posts from the thread “Is Atheism based on superstition? ” on Religious Forum. Please click on the post #1 to get to the discussion.

Atheism has neither basis in Revelation nor in science.
Right? Please
Regards

#1 <<<<paarsurrey

It is not absolutely essential for an Atheist to be reasonable. Atheism people are not bound to look to science for answers.
Are they? Please
Regards

#20 <<<<<paarsurrey

paarsurrey said: Atheism has neither basis in Revelation nor in science.
Right? Please
Regards

Correct. The discussion of atheism would be a topic of philosophy.#27 Willamena

Atheism is a topic of philosophy because it deals with mental relations, namely belief. It also touches on existential being, knowledge, and reality, which also lie in the area of philosophy.#43 Willamena

For ethical, moral and spiritual matters the religious people have to refer to the Revelation, this does not check/stop them referring to science in the matters pertaining material and physical realms, and it is a reasonable approach.
The Atheism do not refer to science necessarily as it is not essential in Atheism. Is it an essential part of Atheism ideology? Please
Regards

#44 paarsurrey

“An attitude toward science may be a concomitant variable but that doesn’t make it part of the same thing”
“Science is not part of atheism”
“So saying atheists look to science for answers may describe most atheists, but even if it described all atheists it wouldn’t be part of what atheism actually is”

I agree with your above points.
Regards

#45 paarsurrey

And Atheism would be as faulty as philosophy happens to be or even more.
Right? Please
Regards

#48 paarsurrey

I’d say a superstition is an unquestioned belief in something/ aka blind faith

Atheism, by definition, goes out of its way to avoid questioning its own beliefs, this is the antithesis of science. So yes .#56 Guy Threepwood

And Atheism is just the same.
Thanks for confirming it.
Please
Regards

#59 paarsurrey

Western Atheist , Indian atheist and Hindu Atheist

March 2, 2021
Western Atheist , Indian atheist and Hindu Atheist

Please view paarsurrey’s post #207  on RF.

Vxxxxx said: Western? Eastern? Are there also northern and southern atheists? If an eastern atheist moves west, does she become a western atheist? How far east does a western atheist have to move to become eastern?

paarsurrey wrote :vide Post #207 : < (Please click on the post # to get right into the discussion to join in , please)

One may like to read the following :

Excerpt from Kunal Srivastava “So in order to explain this let’s see the 3 kinds of atheist I have come across. (Yes, I know an atheist is an atheist. Bear with me)
1. Western Athiest
2. Indian atheist
3. Hindu Atheist
Western atheist: It is simple and clear. There is no God. No supernatural stuff. They ‘usually’ mean the Abhramic god. And Hindu god is assumed to be similar because of deities like Krishna and shiva. Hence, no different from the Christian god.
It’s uninformed but fair enough. They give answers like, I don’t know much about Hinduism, but they are all (religions) the same. You will also find some who are in love with the Vedas and Upanishads and still call themselves atheists.
Indian atheist. They are similar to western atheist but with a difference. I’ve seen 2 kinds. Let’s call them Informed and the fashionable.
Fashionable Indian Athiest: This person has little or no idea of Hinduism. He still believes the Mahabharat and Ramayan are the Shruti, I doubt he even knows what Shruti means. He thinks the definition of the Hindu and Christian god are the same. He has never read or heard of the Upanishad. He doesn’t know what Brahman is. He finds a reason only because of the social evils that he has seen in the society. They like the irreverence and rebel attitude of atheism. An analogy would be wearing a Kurt Cobain t-shirt, but don’t have enough knowledge about nirvana. Just coz it’s cool. Yep, I’m a child of the 90s. They will harp on the stereotypical reasons for not believing in Hindu god. Question them intellectually and they will be found out.
Informed Indian Athiest: These are well read, they understand Hinduism. They educate themselves and have a good reason to be an atheist.
Then we have Hindu Atheist: These are atheists who are the definition of atheism. They don’t believe in god or gods. So what’s different? And what makes them Hindu?” Unquote
What’s the difference between atheists and Hindu atheists? – Quora
Right?

Regards

______________________________________________

Global Atheism Versus Local Atheisms

Western Atheism : Eastern Atheism!

February 28, 2021

Please view paarsurrey’s post on RF.

Vxxxxx said: Western? Eastern? Are there also northern and southern atheists? If an eastern atheist moves west, does she become a western atheist? How far east does a western atheist have to move to become eastern?

paarsurrey wrote :vide Post  #205 : < (Please click on the post # to get to the discussion)


“There Is No “Eastern” Solution” Christopher Hitchens.
Right?

Whether the Eastern Atheism non-believers describe themselves under the apparel of Buddhism (while Buddha was a truthful Messenger/Prophet of G-d) and or project themselves as Agnostics/Skeptics to please the Western Atheism, it is not acceptable to the Western Atheism as they started due to the reaction to the mythical Pauline-Christianity (who mythically elevated Jesus to “son of god” or “god” or ” god in flesh”, without bones to stand upon. While Jesus was a Jew and believed in Oneness of G-d and he was never a Christian.), I understand. Right?
The same is the case of Hinduism people, I figure. Right?

Regards

Are all Atheism people whatever their sect/denomination/type “Weak Atheists”?

February 24, 2021

Please view paarsurrey’s post on RF*.

paarsurrey wrote :vide Post #192  : (Please click on the post # to get to the discussion)

weak atheist.

All Atheism people whatever their sect/denomination/type are and always remain weak unless they end their slackness and get to search/research by using the Religious Method** to find truth that makes one healthier and stronger, one will agree with me for sure, please. Right?

Regards

*

Religious Forums

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/various-kinds-of-atheism.242511/page-10#post-7046586

** Religious Method Post #182 ( )

It was read out with its application authored by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 in the Conference of Great Religions held at Lahore in 1896 in the then British India. The lecture titled ” The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam” has since been translated in many world languages and is available online.
The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam – Wikipedia
The principle is elaborated in first two pages of it:
” It is necessary that a claim and the reasons in support of it must be set forth from a revealed book.”

Right, please?

___________________
https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Philosophy-of-Teachings-of-Islam.pdf :

ISLAM
The essay of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib, the Chief of
Qadian, which was read out by Maulana Abdul Karim Sahib
Sialkoti, in Lahore in the Conference of Great Religions Dharam
Mahutsu9
on 27th December 1896. 10
It is necessary that a claim and the
reasons in support of it must be set forth
from a revealed book.
In this auspicious Conference the purpose of which
is that those who have been invited to participate in it
should expound the merits of their respective religions
with reference to the questions that have been
formulated. I shall today set forth the merits of Islam.
Before I proceed to do so I deem it proper to announce
that I have made it obligatory upon myself that
whatever I state will be based upon the Holy Quran
which is the Word of God Almighty. I consider it
essential that everyone who follows a book, believing it
to be revealed, should base his exposition upon that

  1. This is Hindi expression for Great Religions.
  2. This sentence is by the conveners.

book and should not so extend the scope of his
advocacy of his faith as if he is compiling a new book.
As it is my purpose today to establish the merits of the
Holy Quran and to demonstrate its excellence, it is
incumbent upon me not to state anything which is not
comprehended in the Quran and to set forth everything
on the basis of its verses and in accord with their
meaning and that which might be inferred from them,
so that those attending the Conference should
encounter no difficulty in carrying out a comparison
between the teachings of different religions. As all those
who believe in a revealed book will also confine
themselves to statements comprised in their respective
revealed books, I shall not make any reference to the
traditions of the Holy Prophet, inasmuch as all true
traditions are only derived from the Holy Quran which
is a perfect book comprehending all other books. In
short this is the day of the manifestation of the glory of
the Holy Quran and I humbly beseech God Almighty to
assist me in this undertaking. Amin.

Do nonsense, non-reason and non-methodical all together define Atheism?

February 23, 2021

view paarsurrey’s post on RF.

paarsurrey wrote :vide Post #178  :

Various kinds of Atheism
#175 ^.
Can’t we sum up nonsense, non-reason and non-methodical and understand it making a definition of Atheism that is neither pegged with Theism nor with ism, please? Right?
Just a suggestion, please. Right?
Regards

Religious Forums

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/various-kinds-of-atheism.242511/page-9#post-7045831

Atheism: 10 points of their sluggishness. Right?

February 23, 2021

Kindly view paarsurrey’s post #171 @ < https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/various-kinds-of-atheism.242511/page-9#post-7045506 >

paarsurrey wrote :vide Post #171  :

Various kinds of Atheism

Well, however they (Atheism) deny:

  1. A-theism presupposes theism
  2. and it fractures their claim of default position/no-position
  3. as long as ism is a part of their name, they are an ism
  4. so far they have failed to find any suitable name/title/label, they have tried many, but to no avail
  5. they were slack to research and hence they
  6. leapt into the dark pit without knowing of any merit in it
  7. since they took a new position/no-position out of the norm, so the entail the burden of it to prove, but out of slackness they try to shift it on others, but to no avail
  8. they had no justifying methodology of research of their own to prove to the believers that their cause is correct
  9. as a drowning man catches at a straw they favored Scientific Method, while
  10. they could never demonstrate that it ever proved their ism any better

Right?
Those who agree with me, they are welcome to add more points voluntarily, please. Right?
Kindly correct me if I am wrong, please. Right?

Regards

____________________________________________________

#225

“atheism”

ism
See definition of ism *

noun
a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice:

Synonyms of ism | Thesaurus.com

Right ?

_____________________________________________________

Notes for further research: Search term <Atheism presupposes Theism >

Point-1 of the Post :A-theism presupposes theism

Antitheism Presupposes Theism (And So Does Every Other ‘Ism’)

https://www.proginosko.com/2011/12/antitheism-presupposes-theism-and-so-does-every-other-ism/

One of the most interesting arguments that Van Til made was that “atheism presupposes theism.”

https://shanekastler.typepad.com/pastor_shanes_blog/2013/07/how-atheism-presupposes-theism.html

Professors of philosophy and religion Jeffrey Robbins and Christopher Rodkey take issue with “the evangelical nature of the new atheism, which assumes that it has a Good News to share, at all cost, for the ultimate future of humanity by the conversion of as many people as possible”. They find similarities between the new atheism and evangelical Christianity and conclude that the all-consuming nature of both “encourages endless conflict without progress” between both extremities.[167] Sociologist William Stahl notes: “What is striking about the current debate is the frequency with which the New Atheists are portrayed as mirror images of religious fundamentalists”. He discusses where both have “structural and epistemological parallels” and argues that “both the New Atheism and fundamentalism are attempts to recreate authority in the face of crises of meaning in late modernity”.[168]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_atheism

ANTI-THEISM PRESUPPOSES THEISM

Cornelius Van TilA Christian Theory of Knowledge p.18A Christian Theory of KnowledgeAnti-theism presupposes theismantithesisApologetic methodologyNo neutralityTAGThe one and the manyUltimate commitmentCornelius Van TilPresuppositionsTAGTwo step approachTwo step methodVan Til

https://corneliusvantil.wordpress.com/category/anti-theism-presupposes-theism/

Point -2 of the Post: “and it fractures their claim of default position/no-position: Search terms < fractured Atheism claim of default position/no-position ?

Atheism is the default position aka nonsense

https://www.news24.com/news24/mynews24/atheism-is-the-default-position-aka-nonsense-20160315

This sort of argument is very relevant to the issue of which of atheism and theism is the appropriate “default” position. If theism has a sufficiently low intrinsic probability, then atheism is arguably the correct default position in the sense that ambiguous or absent evidence will justify, not suspending judgment on the issue of God’s existence, but instead believing that God does not exist. This is why Le Poidevin’s argument for agnosticism includes, not just a premise asserting that the relevant evidence is ambiguous, but also one asserting that, at least in the case of versatile theism, we are in the dark when it comes to the issue of which of theism and atheism has a higher intrinsic probability. Unfortunately, much discussion of the issue of which position is the correct “default position” or of who has the “burden of proof” gets sidetracked by bad analogies to Santa Claus, flying spaghetti monsters, and Bertrand Russell’s ([1952] 1997) famous china teapot in elliptical orbit around the sun (see Garvey 2010 and van Inwagen 2012 for criticism of some of these analogies). The low priors argument implicitly addresses this important issue in a much more sophisticated and promising way.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/

ism : Atheism

February 16, 2021

Kindly view paarsurrey’s post #225 @ < https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/favourite-atheist-arguments.242305/page-12#post-7034678 >

Excerpt from the post of friend Vxxxxxx :

 atheism ” (View full post of the poster by clicking #214 )

paarsurrey wrote :vide Post #225  :

ism
See definition of ism *

noun
a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice:

Synonyms of ism | Thesaurus.com

Right ?

Regards

Atheism is emptiness

November 22, 2017

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods, and lacking is like emptiness. The prime reason is that Atheism is completely unsupported by verifiable evidence of its own as an ideology and due to its own faults they don’t believe in the existence of One-True-God/YHVH/Allah, nevertheless they have faith in Atheism. Belief in God or No-God is beyond the limits of science which is a tool limited in the physical and material domains. Whatever the science discovers is never created by it, it only discovers that had already been created by One-True-God/YHVH/Allah.God is Great. 

Thread: “What is the evidence that physics have been/are different? “Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Science and Religion

Post 23: 

[Replying to post 16 by paarsurrey1]

Quote:
…not to mention that Atheism with all its hues and forms are not supported by science.

X——- wrote:

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods. The prime reason is that theism is completely unsupported by verifiable evidence for the existence of gods, further enhanced by the requirement of faith in theism. The more that science discovers about the world we live in, the further gods of all description recede into the background.

Paarsurrey wrote:

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods, and lacking is like emptiness. The prime reason is that Atheism is completely unsupported by verifiable evidence of its own as an ideology and due to its own faults they don’t believe in the existence of One-True-God/YHVH/Allah, nevertheless they have faith in Atheism. Belief in God or No-God is beyond the limits of science which is a tool limited in the physical and material domains. Whatever the science discovers is never created by it, it only discovers that had already been created by One-True-God/YHVH/Allah.God is Great.
Right, please?

Regards

The retention rate of Atheists is 30%, the lowest

June 25, 2014

Please access the link below to know the context of the discussion or to join it. One may comment at this blog if one likes.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3816509-post20.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinayaka
Here’s a study comparing retention rates by religion. (Just for US, I think) I think all faiths struggle to some extent these days. With much more education available, people shift around a lot more in belief, that I suspect they did even 50 years back.

I don’t see it as a bad thing, just an observation on life.

Thoughts?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/genevei…tention-rates/&#8221; Unquote

Paarsurrey wrote:

The retention rate of Atheists is 30%, the lowest, because those belonging to Atheism became as such without a positive proof or evidence in its favor; they must shift it as soon as they realize their blunder.

Regards

Atheism is 100% faith-based :SILENCEOFMIND

May 11, 2014

http://thesuperstitiousnakedape.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/christian-logic/comment-page-1/#comment-15227

SILENCEOFMIND says:
May 9, 2014 at 3:34 pm

Ron,
Since you cannot prove atheism, that means you have 100% faith in it.
You have no evidence for atheism. You just believe it because you hate Christianity.
To reason out rational arguments the claim you are making must be able to stand on its own merits.
Because atheism cannot stand on its own merits, the atheist is left making bigoted attacks on bigoted attacks and committing verbal abuse on anyone who dares offer disagreement.

http://thesuperstitiousnakedape.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/christian-logic/comment-page-1/#comment-15310

Paarsurrey says:

I appreciate your comments.

Regards

http://thesuperstitiousnakedape.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/christian-logic/comment-page-1/#comment-15315

PAARSURREY says:
May 11, 2014 at 4:01 pm
@JOHN ZANDE : May 11, 2014 at 3:37 pm

He might be sometimes; but I have never seen any positive argument favoring Atheism from anybody .
Whenever somebody challenges Atheism; they hide behind “burden of proof”; that suggests Atheism is faith based; cannot stand on its own feet.

I know that Christianity is mythical; it does not belong to teachings of Jesus; and is based on Pauline creeds.

Atheism is a fruit of Pauline Christianity; it surfaced in reaction to mythical creeds of Pauline Christianity.

Regards


%d bloggers like this: