Posts Tagged ‘Agnosticism’

Agnosticism/Skepticism/Atheism are totally wrong

April 30, 2019

Religious Forums

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/why-i-could-never-be-a-christian-or-muslim.220091/page-5#post-6085973

#90 paarsurrey

Why I Could Never Be a Christian (or Muslim)?

There is no compulsion in Quran/Islam/Muhammad, so why should one become a Muslim? Please remain with Agnosticism/Skepticism/Atheism till one realizes that Agnosticism/Skepticism/Atheism are totally wrong . Right, please?

Regards

 

Science does not support Atheism, does it?

October 8, 2017

https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=887315#887315

Post 9: 
Re: Science does not support Atheism, does it?

paarsurrey1 wrote:
Science does not support Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism, does it, please?
Regards

William wrote:
Science does not support atheism or theism. It is a process which is used to examine things which can be examined. Material things.

It is not used to show the fact of existence, but to examine the fact of existence.

In this, science can be used to provide some evidence as to how things on earth came to be but cannot be used to determine whether these things happened through a mindless process or a mindful process.

Thus it cannot support theism or atheism because it cannot show conclusively that the process was or was not a mindful one.

The evidence which comes to light through the process of science can be interpreted either way. The atheist can interpret the evidence as being a mindless process… because the implication of an intelligent creator behind the process = “GOD” and atheism by default is not having any belief in “GODs” … and the theist can interpret the same evidence as being a mindful process, because the theist by default has belief in “GOD(s)” – an intelligent designer or for that matter, a group of intelligent designers.

Science itself is just a process and thus is not something that has an opinion either way. Opinions either way derive from those who interpret the same evidence in a different way.

Science also is not capable of being used to determine what is or isn’t ‘the truthful religion’, even if there actually was one.


Quote:
Science does not support atheism or theism. It is a process which is used to examine things which can be examined. Material things.

Paarsurrey wrote:
Thanks for poising believers and non-believers equally.
As one agrees science does not provide a refuge to Atheism, and the like. Atheism is just a position of indecision having roots neither in Science nor in Religion. All the basics of the truthful Religion, the six Articles of faith* together with five pillars of observance are beyond the observable material science. The truthful founders of all revealed religions and particularly the founder of the Truthful Religion never spoke anything against Science, as a branch of knowledge, or the scientists. They did not want to hamper its progress so they left it open to be dealt with on material observation (belonging to the “seen” realm/s). Religions’ stress is on the “unseen realm/s”:

[2:1] In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[2:2] Alif Lam Mim.
[2:4] Who believe in the unseen and observe Prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them;
[2:5] And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee, and that which was revealed before thee, and they have firm faith in what is yet to come
[2:6] It is they who follow the guidance of their Lord and it is they who shall prosper
https://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=2

Regards
__________
*Six Articles of Faith
• Unity of God
• His Angels
• His Books
• His Prophets
• The Last Day
• Divine Decree
**Five Pillars of Islam (for its observance)
• Kalima
• Prayer
• Fasting
• Zakaat
• Hajj
https://www.alislam.org/

HOT DEBATE: “Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?”

September 23, 2015

Post #198

Further to post #196 above. Jesus’ remains would be found where he journeyed to.
“Jesus’ Deliverance from the Cross & Journey to INDIA”

“I have written this knol so that by adducing proofs from
established facts, conclusive historical evidence of proven
value, and ancient documents of other nations, I might
dispel the serious misconceptions which are current among
Christians and most Muslim sects regarding the earlier and
the later life of Jesus.

[​IMG]

Christians and most Muslims believe that Jesus was
raised to the heavens alive; both have believed for a long
time that Jesus is still alive in the heavens and will return to
the earth sometime in the latter days.”
Citation
marathakam abhijith. Jesus in India….FACT OR FLAW!!: THE FIRST SIDE….. [Internet]. Version 1. Abhijith’s Knols. 2010 Jun 28. Available from:https://abhijithmarathakam.wordpress.com/article/jesus-in-india-fact-or-flaw-33u5226e1zr9g-8/.
Regards

Discussion forum <www.religiousforums.com>Thread: “Where are the remains of Jesus of Nazareth?””.

Please click the post #198  to view, to comment and or join discussion on the topic.

Atheism is not the default position

May 21, 2014

http://atheistenglishman.wordpress.com/about/comment-page-1/#comment-34

paarsurrey on May 21, 2014 at 4:07 pm said:
Atheism is not the default position.

http://atheistenglishman.wordpress.com/about/comment-page-1/#comment-37

AtheistEnglishman on May 21, 2014 at 4:30 pm said:

Care to provide any proof of your assertion? Given the fact that believes are predominantly likely to believe the religion of their parents (or a subtle variant of the same) it is abundantly clear that we are not born with a religion, but that our parents surrender us to a religion, their religion.

http://atheistenglishman.wordpress.com/about/comment-page-1/#comment-40
paarsurrey on May 21, 2014 at 7:35 pm said:

I think there would be only few or a negligible minority of people in the world who would have Atheism as a default position or the original position reasonably. Only those of them could claim Atheism as their default position whose parents were Atheists and hence they need to be helped by the Theists to provide reasonable arguments.

The majority of the Atheists, I think cannot claim Atheism as their default or original position. They belonged to a position of one of the religions in the world; and then they thought it to be convenient to get converted to Atheism (Skepticism, Agnosticism etc) without being convinced with evidences or proofs which they demand from the believers so often.

Atheism is a position of doubt and ignorance, not of certainty. Had they got converted to Atheism with evidences and proofs; they would have them ready to present them to believers?

They just demand evidences and proofs from the believers.

Regards

In search of truth

April 1, 2014

The viewers are advised to visit the link given below to know the context of discussion and then from their independent and sincere opinion.

http://anaivethinker.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/how-i-became-an-atheist/comment-page-1/#comment-121

paarsurrey | April 1, 2014 at 2:53 pm

@ anaivethinker
“. . I would have to try to make evolution and religion work together. . .
. . .
. . .
Do you have a similar experience? Do you know someone with a similar experience? Feel free to comment or question about anything.” Unquote

The observation was correct that evolution/science work together; but the decision was incorrect to become Atheist/Agnostic/Skeptic.

If Bible/Christianity was wrong on occasions; it does not prove Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism automatically correct. Truth of Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism must be proved correct on its own merit.

Truth must be proved of every religions or non-religion on some common criteria.

So your search for truth is incomplete. You went from one extreme to another extreme.

Thanks and regards

A weird concept of Religion and Transcendence

March 24, 2014

http://triangulations.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/humanizing-transcendence/#comment-126885

paarsurrey
03/24/2014 at 6:16 am

@ Sabio Lantz
“Religion is a term used to package very complicated socio-political movements while also capitalizing on internal psychological states.”

There seems to be some error in your concept of religion as given above.

Do you think Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism/”Humanism”/secularism etc are also covered in your concept of religion?

If yes; why?

If no;why?

Please give your proofs and evidences.

Regards

BUDDHA HAS DEFINITELY NO CONNECTION WITH NON-THEISM, ATHEISM, AGNOSTICISM, SKEPTICISM

February 28, 2014

Please view Paarsurrey’s comments on the following blog for your valuable opinion:

“NonProphet Status (NPS)”
“KAREN STOLLZNOW INTERVIEW, PART TWO
FEBRUARY 20TH, 2014 | POSTED BY: CHRIS STEDMAN”

http://nonprophetstatus.com/

http://nonprophetstatus.com/2014/02/20/karen-stollznow-interview-part-two/#comment-1265013329

PAARSURREY • A FEW SECONDS AGO
@KAREN STOLLZNOW
@CHRIS STEDMAN

“NONTHEISM IS ALSO COMPATIBLE WITH BUDDHISM”
MAYBE THE BUDDHISM IN AMERICA HAS SOME CONNECTION WITH NON-THEISM OR ATHEISM/AGNOSTICISM/SKEPTICISM; BUT BUDDHA HAS DEFINITELY NO CONNECTION WITH THEM (NON-THEISM OR ATHEISM/AGNOSTICISM/SKEPTICISM).

PAARSURREY • 12 MINUTES AGO
@KAREN STOLLZNOW:

“THE BEST WAY TO BE SENSITIVE TO THESE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES IS TO GET TO KNOW THEIR MEMBERS PERSONALLY AND TO SEE THEM AS PEOPLE, NOT AS STEREOTYPES PERPETUATED IN MOVIES, BOOKS AND ONLINE. FOR EACH RELIGION PROFILED I HAD DIRECT CONTACT WITH MEMBERS OF THESE GROUPS. IT WAS ALSO IMPORTANT FOR ME TO WORK WITH EX-MEMBERS OF THESE GROUPS, TO GAIN INSIGHT FROM THOSE WHO ARE NOW OUTSIDERS, AND HAVE A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE AS FORMER INSIDERS.”

I AM AN AHMADI PEACEFUL MUSLIM. I LIKE THE APPROACH OF KAREN STOLLZNOW. ONE MUST HAVE A PERSONAL CONTACT WITH THE COMMUNITIES TO WHOM ONE WANTS A MEANINGFUL DIALOGUES. I APPRECIATE IT. IT IS ETHICALLY GOOD.

http://nonprophetstatus.com/2014/02/20/karen-stollznow-interview-part-two/#comment-1265013329

Atheism cannot be a position of default or position of origin; why?

February 19, 2014

http://calladus.blogspot.ca/2010/05/what-i-believe.html

paarsurrey said…
@ Calladus :

“I lack any belief in a deity.

This is a “default” position for me. I have not found sufficient evidence to encourage belief in a deity.”

I don’t get you. Were you an Atheist when you gained consciousness as a child, as far as you remember?

Please

18/2/14 9:19 AM

Calladus said…
My earliest memories were full of magic, wonder and fear.

I was scared to death of the “Bumble”, from the Christmas animation, “Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer”.

I was also pretty scared of monsters and ghosts – I’d read about them in “Tales from the Crypt” comics that my older teenage neighbor liked to read.

And, I thought that butterflies were magical – we were in the middle of the Monarch butterfly migration path, and our yard would be filled with them every year.

I don’t remember much about Church at this age, because I’d go to the Pre-kindergarten child care when Mom and Dad went to church. I played with the blocks there and built things with them.

As a child, I’d have my father check under my bed and in my closet for monsters, and I’d have my mom leave the hallway light on.

So if you are claiming that my “default position” is whatever I believed as a child, then it would be about Bumbles, ghosts and monsters.

But no deities. I just didn’t think about them.

18/2/14 10:54 AM

Calladus said…

I think I see a pattern here. People think that “Belief” is some sort of binary logic. Sort of like computer logic, that is either 1 or 0, or “True” or “False”.

And what is funny, is that binary logic isn’t even true with computers. There is a Third State, known as “Tri-state” or “Hi-Z”, which are both fancy ways of saying, “Disconnected”.

I don’t have a belief that a deity exists. I don’t have a belief that a deity does NOT exist. I don’t bother with believing, or disbelieving.

Instead, I’m disconnected from belief in a deity.

As are you, dear reader, about a great many things.

For example you are disconnected from belief in Trugs. You don’t believe in a Trug, you don’t disbelieve in a Trug.

And if I informed you that a Trug was a supernatural creature, you might still not form a belief stance on Trugs. After all, why bother? It doesn’t affect you one way or another.

No matter what I say about a Trug, you are unaffected unless I can bring some sort of convincing evidence.

18/2/14 11:04 AM

paarsurrey said…

@Calladus :18/2/14 10:54 AM

“So if you are claiming that my ‘default position’ is whatever I believed as a child, then it would be about Bumbles, ghosts and monsters.”

I wanted to know the original position or the original default position since you got consciousness of existence of life.I don’t think you would have described your position as Atheism at that time.

Am I right?

From: https://paarsurrey.wordpress.com/

18/2/14 12:13 PM

Calladus said…
No, I would not have described my “position” as atheism at the age of 4 or 5.

Who would?

Please, tell me what child would describe ANYTHING as their life philosophy at the age of 4 or 5?

Maybe you know of a child prodigy?

18/2/14 1:30 PM

Paarsurrey said: ( paarsurrey sent these comments but these are still awaited to be published after moderation; not yet exhibited on the Calladus blog):

@ Calladus:18/2/14 1:30 PM
“No, I would not have described my “position” as atheism at the age of 4 or 5″

May be I could not express my thoughts properly.
There must be a first stage at which you would have been able to name it as Atheism.
At what age this happened?
Before it; it was not Atheism.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Paarsurrey adds further to the above discussion:

I think there would be only few or a negligible minority of people in the world who would have Atheism as a default position or the original position reasonably. Only those of them could claim Atheism as their default position whose parents were Atheists and hence they need to be helped by the Theists to provide reasonable arguments.

The majority of the Atheists, I think cannot claim Atheism as their default or original position. They belonged to a position of one of the religions in the world; and then they thought it to be convenient to get converted to Atheism (Skepticism, Agnosticism etc) without being convinced with evidences or proofs which they demand from the believers so often.

Atheism is a position of doubt and ignorance, not of certainty. Had they got converted to Atheism with evidences and proofs; they would have them ready to present them to believers?

They just demand evidences and proofs from the believers and are hesitant even to define as to what they mean from “evidence” or “proof”; a dictionary cannot be much useful in this connection; as everyone of them differs with others.

“It’s All Over?”

July 14, 2013

Paarsurrey says:

The only tools the atheists have are to ask others to provide evidence; if one counters them to provide one; they cannot come up with any.

Their others tools are to ridicule, to be sarcastic and to deride.

All religion(s) (there’s no end of them) should be investigated very seriously. Especially before acceptance, very few do so they are accepted and more ‘holy warriors’ swarm to the cause. Not good …

 

I agree with you; and Atheism , Humanism, Scepticism, Agnosticism etc.., should not be an exception; they should be continuously seen with doubt; as doubt is their basic approach. Doubt, however, cannot lead one to certainty, in my opinion.

I don’t see any much contribution of them in the human history that exceeds from the theists.

 

Argus
July 18th, 2013 at 4:29 am

I likewise try to be a good person. I just don’t like all the agony that various superstitions have created (and are still causing) throughout the ages, I try as best I can to fight it.

I do state without reservation that if there is a God — it’s nothing like many ‘religions’ would have us think.

Even Zen has a saying which means quite literally to “beware of false prophets”—

If you meet the Buddha on the road … kill him!

Fide Dubitandum

they_think_its_all_over_1999a-smallThe Spectator has published an article, proclaiming the end of the New Atheist movement, and the rise of a group of atheist thinkers who see religion in a much more nuanced way.

As much as I’d like to believe this, I’m not convinced.

Yes, I’d say that the New Atheism, like any movement, must always face the choice between adaptation or death. And, yes, they will eventually need to acknowledge the complex realities of life, and transition out of this simple atheism-good/religion-bad narrative that they hammer so tirelessly if they want people to keep listening.

But it is a bit premature to say that the movement is dead. Some are starting to realize that its treatment of religion has been unfair to the point of propagandistic, and journalists do seem to feel that the novelty of hearing someone proclaim “the world would simply be better without religion” has worn…

View original post 256 more words

Christianity and Islam v Atheism and Agnosticism

July 13, 2013

Our entire civilization is based on the ‘religious’ doctrines ad ideals: that are essentially based on the enslavement of the individual. Half of the world follows Christianity and Islam. The world it seems never had common sense to begin with. The system needs a complete overhaul to fix itself.

      • I think one has viewed the phenomena wrongly.

        Education and critical thinking support the truthful religion and do it no harm.

        In fact it will expose the wrong thinking of the atheists.

      • There is not a single ‘prophecy of the old testament that can be considered valid. None.Thus,the Quar’an, like the bible is false doctrine, based on an erroneous lie.
        Further more, there is absolutely no archaeological evidence whatsoever to support Moses, the Exodus or the Conquest of Canaan.
        Every world renowned archaeologist and Jewish biblical scholar , including Rabbis, recognizes this fact, and have done for years. Only fundamentalists continue to deny it.

      • I respect your views and opinions; but I have to point out that neither the historians nor the archaeologist claim to be 100 % correct.

        Quran was first to confirm that Bible had light in it and guidance of the original Word revealed on Moses and other messengers prophets of the same lineage; yet it was in a corrupted form and is not in its original form.

        It is good that as you say that the Rabbis have now acknowledged these things.

        I don’t side with the fundamentalists; one should follow the middle path which is also the straight path and is a moderate way of life.

        I think there are many prophecies of Moses that have been fulfilled.

        Should I provide a link for the prophecies of prophets that have since been fulfilled?

        I consider you as a friend and have no intention to oppose you unnecessarily.

        We are all human being with all the merits and demerits associated with a human.