Anonymous wrote:The absence of belief in a God will always be considered under the category of religion/dogmas, and not accounting or medicine.
Some atheists deny the existence of a deity because of their belief that evidence does not exist, not because evidence shows it does not exist.
Dark matter was unknown before. Its accepted by physicists today. That humans lacked evidence of its existence does not mean it did not exist before. I do not think the choice to be an atheist is always or necessarily arrived at by looking at evidence.
Anonymous wrote:I thought the bible does speak about 7 heavens thi?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If Pullman lets you go either way on the issue of faith, then he's making you think. If the "correct" conclusion is spelled out for you, then it's, uhh, atheist proselytizing.
Atheists don't proselytize, they point out facts and debunk beliefs for which there is no evidence, or contrary evidence.
Whatever it is they do, they do it very aggressively. And constantly. But that's not proselytizing, is it?![]()
like scientists explaining evolution? Doctors recommending regular exercise? Like accountants balancing the budget?
I don't think I have read more absurd comparisons. Medicine, accounting, health recommendations are not based to diverse belief systems. They are based on universally held beliefs, unlike religion. You win the prize, Einstein!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If Pullman lets you go either way on the issue of faith, then he's making you think. If the "correct" conclusion is spelled out for you, then it's, uhh, atheist proselytizing.
Atheists don't proselytize, they point out facts and debunk beliefs for which there is no evidence, or contrary evidence.
Whatever it is they do, they do it very aggressively. And constantly. But that's not proselytizing, is it?![]()
like scientists explaining evolution? Doctors recommending regular exercise? Like accountants balancing the budget?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If Pullman lets you go either way on the issue of faith, then he's making you think. If the "correct" conclusion is spelled out for you, then it's, uhh, atheist proselytizing.
Atheists don't proselytize, they point out facts and debunk beliefs for which there is no evidence, or contrary evidence.
Whatever it is they do, they do it very aggressively. And constantly. But that's not proselytizing, is it?![]()
like scientists explaining evolution? Doctors recommending regular exercise? Like accountants balancing the budget?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If Pullman lets you go either way on the issue of faith, then he's making you think. If the "correct" conclusion is spelled out for you, then it's, uhh, atheist proselytizing.
Atheists don't proselytize, they point out facts and debunk beliefs for which there is no evidence, or contrary evidence.
Whatever it is they do, they do it very aggressively. And constantly. But that's not proselytizing, is it?![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If Pullman lets you go either way on the issue of faith, then he's making you think. If the "correct" conclusion is spelled out for you, then it's, uhh, atheist proselytizing.
Atheists don't proselytize, they point out facts and debunk beliefs for which there is no evidence, or contrary evidence.
Anonymous wrote:If Pullman lets you go either way on the issue of faith, then he's making you think. If the "correct" conclusion is spelled out for you, then it's, uhh, atheist proselytizing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wait, I am confused, so does the trilogy have an atheist msg or does it tie science to religion?
The message is that God is dead. As I remember, the kids literally give the decrepit old guy the final shove, or maybe he dies in front of them. Anyhoo, it's Pullman's wishful thinking about the demise of faith.
No, the trilogy is not tying science to religion in any way -- 14:34 was pulling your leg, or something. The books actually have the opposite intention, of showing that science and faith are at war. It's been several years since I read the trilogy, but I don't remember much actual science in the books. The science itself, such as it is, is fun Harry Potter stuff.
PS, I wrote above that he's a crappy writer. I stand by that! Read Harry Potter to see this sort of kids' literature done right.
Harry Potter is also a great series, but the His Dark Materials trilogy really makes you think and I think it goes deeper than Harry Potter. Also, the writing styles are completely different and I don't think they should be compared.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wait, I am confused, so does the trilogy have an atheist msg or does it tie science to religion?
The message is that God is dead. As I remember, the kids literally give the decrepit old guy the final shove, or maybe he dies in front of them. Anyhoo, it's Pullman's wishful thinking about the demise of faith.
No, the trilogy is not tying science to religion in any way -- 14:34 was pulling your leg, or something. The books actually have the opposite intention, of showing that science and faith are at war. It's been several years since I read the trilogy, but I don't remember much actual science in the books. The science itself, such as it is, is fun Harry Potter stuff.
All I said is that the books talk about parallel worlds and dark matter.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wait, I am confused, so does the trilogy have an atheist msg or does it tie science to religion?
The message is that God is dead. As I remember, the kids literally give the decrepit old guy the final shove, or maybe he dies in front of them. Anyhoo, it's Pullman's wishful thinking about the demise of faith.
No, the trilogy is not tying science to religion in any way -- 14:34 was pulling your leg, or something. The books actually have the opposite intention, of showing that science and faith are at war. It's been several years since I read the trilogy, but I don't remember much actual science in the books. The science itself, such as it is, is fun Harry Potter stuff.
PS, I wrote above that he's a crappy writer. I stand by that! Read Harry Potter to see this sort of kids' literature done right.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wait, I am confused, so does the trilogy have an atheist msg or does it tie science to religion?
The message is that God is dead. As I remember, the kids literally give the decrepit old guy the final shove, or maybe he dies in front of them. Anyhoo, it's Pullman's wishful thinking about the demise of faith.
No, the trilogy is not tying science to religion in any way -- 14:34 was pulling your leg, or something. The books actually have the opposite intention, of showing that science and faith are at war. It's been several years since I read the trilogy, but I don't remember much actual science in the books. The science itself, such as it is, is fun Harry Potter stuff.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wait, I am confused, so does the trilogy have an atheist msg or does it tie science to religion?
The message is that God is dead. As I remember, the kids literally give the decrepit old guy the final shove, or maybe he dies in front of them. Anyhoo, it's Pullman's wishful thinking about the demise of faith.
No, the trilogy is not tying science to religion in any way -- 14:34 was pulling your leg, or something. The books actually have the opposite intention, of showing that science and faith are at war. It's been several years since I read the trilogy, but I don't remember much actual science in the books. The science itself, such as it is, is fun Harry Potter stuff.