The Inadequacy of Atheism

There is a statement from the mahabharata that goes to the effect of a king that does not wield the rod of punishment (ie does not enforce laws) and the brahmana (priest) who is too attached to household life (material convenience/facility etc) is swallowed by the earth (ie they fall down from their position).

...... anyway


I am not surprised that you perceive religion as a politically motivated phenomena since it seems you have a greater passion for the political aspects of religion more than the philosophical

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Evidence for these, please:

(a) An absence of joy and pleasure in the world;
(b) A nullification of the meaning inherent in the named social groups;
(c) An absence of virtues (what are these?), purity and decency.

In each case, please explain clearly how the phenomenon is related to a rise in atheism. I'm looking for some kind of statistical support - not the highly subjective opinions of any single individual.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It seems that in some threads on this forum somebody will provide a comprehensive, definitive rebuttal or argument which goes completely unremarked. At the end of the first page of this thread Cris gave such a viewpoint which addressed the original post point-by-point. Why no mention of it in more than a page of subsequent contributions? Lightgigantic?

PS. My own view: trying to equate religious (non)belief with environmental respect (or the lack of) is absurd.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The Inadequacy of Atheism

This has nothing to do with atheism. I should note that while being cleanly is beneficial – being overly so may lead to many illnesses due having an immune system that doesn’t function properly.

Again – nothing to do with Atheism. Cows were domesticated by theists. As a matter of fact I think many Hindu’s keep cows for their milk.

That’s their business. This certainly has nothing to do with Atheism.

This has to do with a change in climate – draughts are a natural part of the earths weather pattern.

OK – and so what? What are these Atheistic doctrines? Philosophy? If so then it may be difficult for small minded people to grasp Immanuel Kant's writtings or Bertrand Russell etc... but hey if so then it would (if anything) be a good thing!

I’m atheist and may family has a lot of meaning to me. As for Clan and Caste – yes they are meaningless. Many Theists will agree that is so as well.

Again this has nothing to do with Atheism and all to do with those particular men.

What are these Laws? Gravity? Centrifugal Force?

How does one disharmonize with one of these Laws?

Questions:
1.
Buddhists do not tend to believe in Gods – are they disharmonizing with these Laws of the Universe?
2.
Polytheists believe in some Gods and not other Gods (that is for some Gods they are Atheist) are they disharmonizing with these Laws of the Universe?
3.
Monotheists believe in One God and not other Gods (that is for some Gods they are Atheist) are they disharmonizing with these Laws of the Universe?

Questions:
1.
What do you mean therefore the greatest calamity is atheism? I did not see anything that lead me to think “therefore the greatest calamity is atheism”.

Please explain what on Earth lead you to come to the conclusion: Therefore the greatest calamity is atheism.

2.
This is what you are saying:
The universe operates under certain laws and disharmonizing with them is the root cause of all calamity ------- therefore the greatest calamity is atheism.


The only way the above statement can be true (therefore .... ) tis if the “certain laws” are that one must be a Theist.

Questions:
1.
How many Gods must one worship?
2.
What about Buddha (He was more enlightened than the Gods) – can one believe on Buddha and not Gods and still not violate the “certain laws”?
3.
Are monotheists breaking the Law?
4.
Are Shinto breaking the Law (they only beleive in 'Japanese' Gods)?


Thanks
Michael

 

LightG., have you nothing more to do than quote mythology to prove mythology is true?

 

Aye - we call them PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY, BIOLOGY etc.

Actually - it is an impossibility to "disharmonize" with the laws of this universe. EVERYTHING acts according to those laws - and if we see that it doesn't then it is because we have not fully understood those laws yet.
This is how SCIENCE works.

It is only when people claim to be able to flout these Laws - "disharmonizing with them" - that problems have arisen. And one common element of ALL GODS is their ability to flout the Laws of our Universe.

It is therefore the supposed GODS themselves that are the "disharmonizing" influence within this Universe!!

The greatest calamity was early-Man's willingness to accept an unprovable blanket explanation for his deepest, unanswerable, questions.

 

what can I say - 40 plus hits in 24 hours is a bit of an inundation - thought I touched most of cris's statements in brief in my first open intro'd response earlier.

Its not clear why you would perceive the environment as totally unconnected with god (even in theory) - although it is a common mispractice in some strains of xtian theistic philosophy to seperate god from his creation that you may be responding to

on the side I remember when the tsunami hit a few years ago all the newspapers were full of headlines like "the fury of god" etc .... no atheists in a fox hole

 

Er... lack of evidence?

Once again the theist is happy to pull colloquialisms and idioms as supposed evidence of someone's belief.

So if I say "For God's sake, stop annoying me!" does that make me a believer?
Or how about when I say "Jesus Christ!" when surprised by something?

Secondly - since when are headlines in newspapers written for atheists?
And how does a newspaper headline claiming things like "The Fury of God" equate to there being "no atheists in a fox hole"?
It's an utter non-sequitor, and another of your great flawed examples.

 

Sarkus

thats why I included (even in theory)....

It just indicates how the connection between god and the movements of the environment is not absurd - maybe it would be more correct to say such connections are outside our current understandings of the universe - my point was that it is absurd to use the word "absurd"

 

Now you are merely changing the meaning and tack of your statements. When they fail in their original purpose you quickly change to a different one.
Pathetic.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

on the contrary I am establishing the meaning of the statements I was responding to - in debate this is called clarification

 

Nope. The Kali Yuga is over, done, finished.

 

what yug is this then?

 

How do you explain that kali yuga has finished? How do you explain the prominence of the symptoms of kali and the complete absence of the symptoms of satya yuga?

 

Sounds like those poor dinosaurs were a victim of universal disharmony. I take it you have a definitive proof of this that applies to all 'calamities'.

There is zero connection of the first assertion to this conclusion and what the heck is superior mantenance in the universe? Is that an ultra-janitor or something?

 

Executed offender's last statements:

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm

Few of them aren't religious.

 

do you mean religious in a kali yuga sense?

 

I don't eat that health food stuff.

 

in otherwords is religiousity completely bereft of any factors to determine a quality amongst theists - is it inconceivable for aspects of atheism to emerge amongst a theist?

 

I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean exactly. I doubt there are any "aspects" of atheism, seeing as how is just means a disbelief in a God(s).