Black Atheists : Can an athiest be spiritual?

SlickBeast

Well-Known Member
REGISTERED MEMBER
Sep 2, 2011
635
363
Down Under
Occupation
Programmer/Game developer
:thinking:

I have to agree in that Science is changing every day and exposing more and more truths, that is if we are ever told the truth. But from what little bit I have studied thus far, it seems that there are things that do make sense in connection with the Annunaki and the Sumer info. What if that is what's evolving? The truth of what and why we were created? It all matches with the bible.

No?
The bible? Have you ever read the bible? The bible has as much scientific truths in it as the The Silmarillion written by the late Tolkien. Jews for example were never slaves in Egypt, at least not in large numbers. There is absolutely no archaeological evidence for it. Jews might have been mercenaries. It's all a big work of fiction by somebody who dreamed about the big superpower of the day, Egypt.

Here is a massive list of biblical inconsistencies.
http://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf
 

houserunner

Well-Known Member
REGISTERED MEMBER
Feb 12, 2010
1,065
1,154
Well, let me say this first. What we know is so little compare to what we don't know. I'm not afraid to say I'm ignorant of so many things if not most things. But that said, science is progressing at an exponential pace and is the best tool we have at understanding the universe. Because unlike religion is not based on dogmas. What is not known today will be revealed tomorrow.

Now to your question. The problem with your initiator theory is that it leaves us with that elephant in the room that is the ultimate creator. Then who initiates that creator? You say nothing! or you say he is not a being, yet you fail to explain what kind of entity that creator is or fail to explain why he plays by another rule. This is where your logic fails and becomes inconsistent (some might say dishonest) as it is circular reasoning. If you say our mind cannot comprehend this entity, then there is no point for you to engage in this type of argument. You should not engage in reasoned argument and only dedicate yourself to faith, blind belief in some entity, the moon, or Santa for that matters.

You see this question boils down not to atoms but down to the space-time fabrics of the universe and string theory. This is where the frontier of science are at, hence explaining my first statement. But the exploration continues. Science is dynamic, ever changing. Scientists have found the Higg Boson, haven't they? The gap in which your god in hiding is narrowing every passing day. These no reason not to believe atoms, molecules can arrange themselves into more complicated systems like the solar systems, DNA, cells etc simply by conforming to the basic laws of the universe. Who created those laws, you say? Why do they need a creator, I say?


OK, I tend to not like to post novels on forums (type too much in a post) but I will break from that this once given how this conversation has evolved.

I believe I see where this is going with you. You are debating me as if I am a person trying to promote religion and all I stated in my original post in this thread is my thoughts on what I believe and was not trying to preach to anyone of some deity that resides in clouds that promises thereafter life in heaven as long as you worship that deity, give up money, and believe every asinine thing that is to be believed within that religion or that there is a “Shangri-La”, if you may, that has countless virgins at your disposal. Your soul debate attempt with your initial response was to attack my belief of a creator as if I stated I had finite proof of facts of my belief. If that was the case then it would not be a belief, it would be undisputed fact and if I did have that knowledge of alleged fact I doubt I would be here entangled with a debate with you.

From what I gather, and I could be wrong, is that you have spent many a time debating “religious” types that try to get others to believe in what they are preaching so you are retorting in the fashion you would typically do in those cases. The problem with that is I am not religious in any form or fashion nor do I have an agenda to promote my thoughts as though everyone should follow it as doctrine. So when you say “your god” I am not entirely sure where you are getting at here. I take the meaning of a god to be something that is praised and all that other bull. That is not what I was getting at to begin with. I specifically stated “creator” for a reason. Now when I said not a being, I meant a being like any of the animal type species that we know of that reside on our planet. Call it what you will, if you need it to be labeled as a “being", so be it, a particle, or whatever there is SOMETHING that set things in motion so there was no dishonesty in my approach. You seem to still think that I am saying, and correct me if I am wrong, that there is some human-type form out there that started it all. That is what I gather from your reply at least.

I also am privy to the science and realize that it is used to discover the unknowns out there so my questions to you in this thread were rhetorical. I have always stated that I do not know everything and do not come at anyone with that notion. I also do not accept absolute statements without the facts backing them up, which I believe we are in agreement on, and which is why I am not about all the religious stuff. But as you stated yourself, “What we know is so little compare to what we don't know. I'm not afraid to say I'm ignorant of so many things if not most things.” so basically starting a debate with me on what I came to a logical conclusion to believe and not try to present as absolute fact to anyone was a fruitless venture as some of your comments actually back up my logic in the belief of there has to be a creator, initiator, or processor if you may. And what that entity actually is I could not tell you nor am I trying to say I know of said entity.
You go on to say, “There is no reason not to believe atoms, molecules can arrange themselves into more complicated systems like the solar systems, DNA, cells etc simply by conforming to the basic laws of the universe.” and my questions are how are they doing it themselves, what is the driving force of the molecules, what is the driving force of the Higgs Boson? As you yourself have stated, science is tracking this down and it will continue to do so but in the end they will be led, in my opinion, to an origin that set things in motion whatever that origin may be.

So in conclusion I think we have exhausted this debate as we may just end up agreeing to disagree about my stated belief. I will just let it rest with that. Good debate though.

Man, after all that typing I feel like I need a publisher.

Peace
 

Queenie

Well-Known Member
PREMIUM MEMBER
Feb 9, 2001
7,136
2,067
OK, I tend to not like to post novels on forums (type too much in a post) but I will break from that this once given how this conversation has evolved.

I believe I see where this is going with you. You are debating me as if I am a person trying to promote religion and all I stated in my original post in this thread is my thoughts on what I believe and was not trying to preach to anyone of some deity that resides in clouds that promises thereafter life in heaven as long as you worship that deity, give up money, and believe every asinine thing that is to be believed within that religion or that there is a “Shangri-La”, if you may, that has countless virgins at your disposal. Your soul debate attempt with your initial response was to attack my belief of a creator as if I stated I had finite proof of facts of my belief. If that was the case then it would not be a belief, it would be undisputed fact and if I did have that knowledge of alleged fact I doubt I would be here entangled with a debate with you.

From what I gather, and I could be wrong, is that you have spent many a time debating “religious” types that try to get others to believe in what they are preaching so you are retorting in the fashion you would typically do in those cases. The problem with that is I am not religious in any form or fashion nor do I have an agenda to promote my thoughts as though everyone should follow it as doctrine. So when you say “your god” I am not entirely sure where you are getting at here. I take the meaning of a god to be something that is praised and all that other bull. That is not what I was getting at to begin with. I specifically stated “creator” for a reason. Now when I said not a being, I meant a being like any of the animal type species that we know of that reside on our planet. Call it what you will, if you need it to be labeled as a “being", so be it, a particle, or whatever there is SOMETHING that set things in motion so there was no dishonesty in my approach. You seem to still think that I am saying, and correct me if I am wrong, that there is some human-type form out there that started it all. That is what I gather from your reply at least.

I also am privy to the science and realize that it is used to discover the unknowns out there so my questions to you in this thread were rhetorical. I have always stated that I do not know everything and do not come at anyone with that notion. I also do not accept absolute statements without the facts backing them up, which I believe we are in agreement on, and which is why I am not about all the religious stuff. But as you stated yourself, “What we know is so little compare to what we don't know. I'm not afraid to say I'm ignorant of so many things if not most things.” so basically starting a debate with me on what I came to a logical conclusion to believe and not try to present as absolute fact to anyone was a fruitless venture as some of your comments actually back up my logic in the belief of there has to be a creator, initiator, or processor if you may. And what that entity actually is I could not tell you nor am I trying to say I know of said entity.
You go on to say, “There is no reason not to believe atoms, molecules can arrange themselves into more complicated systems like the solar systems, DNA, cells etc simply by conforming to the basic laws of the universe.” and my questions are how are they doing it themselves, what is the driving force of the molecules, what is the driving force of the Higgs Boson? As you yourself have stated, science is tracking this down and it will continue to do so but in the end they will be led, in my opinion, to an origin that set things in motion whatever that origin may be.

So in conclusion I think we have exhausted this debate as we may just end up agreeing to disagree about my stated belief. I will just let it rest with that. Good debate though.

Man, after all that typing I feel like I need a publisher.

Peace
:lol:
 

thePreacher

Well-Known Member
BANNED
Dec 2, 2007
1,227
818
Dogville, USA
Occupation
Agent Of Change
The bible? Have you ever read the bible? The bible has as much scientific truths in it as the The Silmarillion written by the late Tolkien. Jews for example were never slaves in Egypt, at least not in large numbers. There is absolutely no archaeological evidence for it. Jews might have been mercenaries. It's all a big work of fiction by somebody who dreamed about the big superpower of the day, Egypt.

Here is a massive list of biblical inconsistencies.
http://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

The bible has a lot of value but to see it you first have to reject most of what Christianity has been saying the bible is. The bible is like the Bhagavad Gita and the Book of Coming Forth Into Day. Which is to say that the bible is not an historical record, nor is it a science textbook. The bible, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Book of Coming Forth Into Day are spiritual myths carefully designed to confuse the unenlightened while educating the enlightened.

In that regard, both Christians and Atheists are the unenlightened because they both are, unwisely, judging the bible by whether or not it is an accurate historical record.

Zen Buddhists 'get' this because their spiritual practice prepares them to make sense out of what appears to be nonsensical koans when viewed literally.
 

Enki

The Evolved Amphibian
REGISTERED MEMBER
Aug 27, 2010
7,869
4,875
The Third Plane of Existence
Occupation
Civil Eng.
Man, after all that typing I feel like I need a publisher.

Peace

Yeah...this was long....I liked it...but long...I had to take bathroom break:lol::lol:


Peace!
 

Is Trump Going to Prison?

  • yes

  • no


Results are only viewable after voting.

Latest profile posts

cherryblossom wrote on watzinaname's profile.
Dropping by to say, "Hi!" ,sister Watz. Hope all is well.
cherryblossom wrote on WARRIOR's profile.
Hey, Warrior! Right On!
Top