Clipmarks | Theism Clips

How Can This Be???

Sat, 19 Sep 2009 03:32:50 GMT

clipped by: AtlLiberal
clipper's remarks: How in the world can a person be a decent, moral person without the promise of heaven or the threat of hell. Just what is this world coming to???

Now I'll carefully remove my tongue from my cheek.

Clip Source: www.nwcn.com

Third atheist billboard goes up in Moscow

MOSCOW, Idaho -- It reads "Millions are good without God" and it appeared on Tuesday in Moscow.

It is the third billboard of its kind to go up in the area, part of an advertising campaign by the American Humanist Association.

The AHA says the campaign is meant to spread awareness. Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the AHA says "too many people think that morality is the exclusive domain of the religious--we're here to prove the assumption is wrong."

"We've had great success with this advertising campaign," said Speckhardt.

The AHA was founded in 1941 and has its headquarters in Washington, D.C. They profess a belief in humanism, which is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism, affirms human responsibility to lead ethical lives.

The praying agnostic

Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:13:14 GMT

clipped by: Antara

Clip Source: blog.kennypearce.net

There is no reason why someone who is in doubt about the existence of God should not pray for help and guidance on this topic as in other matters. Some find something comic in the idea of an agnostic praying to a God whose existence he doubts. It is surely no more unreasonable than the act of a man adrift in the ocean, trapped in a cave, or stranded on a mountainside, who cries for help though he may never be heard or fires a signal which may never be seen.
- Anthony Kenny, The God of the Philosophers, p. 129, as quoted in T. J. Mawson's review of John Cottingham, ed., The Meaning of Theism in the recent issue of Faith and Philosophy

blog.kennypearce.net

Tags: agnostics, prayer, philosophy, theology

From Skepticism to Worship

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:05:06 GMT

clipped by: willhelm

Clip Source: www.ex-atheist.com

FROM SKEPTICISM TO WORSHIP

by
A.S.A. Jones
09/01/02

MY PERSONAL TESTIMONY

I was a devout atheist for over twenty years. In July of 1998, I finally managed to see the biblical truths that had managed to elude me. The following is an account of how I went from hardcore skepticism to hardcore worship of the Savior, Jesus Christ.

RATIONAL THOUGHT REPLACES THE GOD OF MY YOUTH

RATIONAL THOUGHT REPLACES MY COMPASSION FOR OTHERS

RATIONAL THOUGHT TURNS FROM SCIENCE TO PHILOSOPHY

MY PHILOSOPHY TURNS ANTI-CHRISTIAN

THE PARADOX OF BIBLICAL JABBERWOCKY

I SEE IT!

A NEW CREATURE

Tags: theism

Why theism is not such a bad idea

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:32:18 GMT

clipped by: Efrain Alvarado

Clip Source: catholicfire.blogspot.com

Warning: Graphic Content -- Not for children.

[Video]

Tags: atheism, materialism, socialism, communism

Agnostics and atheists

Sat, 09 May 2009 20:57:01 GMT

clipped by: JohnWaterman
clipper's remarks: Using this definition (which seems right to me) most atheists I've met are open minded enough to be called agnostic atheists, whereas most theists are (in my experience) pretty close minded gnostic theists; they tend to confuse "believing" and "knowing".

Clip Source: moronail.net

There is a common misconception that agnosticism lies somewhere between theism and atheism.

In truth, they are not comparable terms. Theism, and atheism, are about belief. Gnosticism, and agnosticism, are about knowledge.

Agnosticism is essentially just saying "we do not (or can not) know". However, that has no bearing over whether one actively believes in a deity.

For example, one could say, "I believe in a god, but don't think we can truly prove his/her existence", and you'd be an agnostic theist. On the opposite side, "I don't believe in a god, but don't think we can truly prove they don't exist" is an agnostic atheist.

There are, of course, the much less reasonable viewpoints on both ends, as well: "There is definitely a god," "there definitely is no god". Those would be gnostic theist, and gnostic atheist, views.

Misconceptions

Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:35:27 GMT

clipped by: AtlLiberal
clipper's remarks: Like many concepts people hold, atheism is often viewed as a belief system filled with dogma and intent on pushing an "agenda". This article may help to dispel this false notion.

Clip Source: atheism.about.com

Myth: Militant Atheists are Atheist Fundamentalists, a New Atheism

Myth:

Militant atheists are just another type of fundamentalist, rudely pushing their religion on everyone else. These atheist fundamentalists are just as dangerous, intolerant, and dogmatic as any Christian fundamentalist.

Response:
There seems to be an increasing number of people responding to atheist critiques of religion or theism by labeling the person a "fundamentalist" atheist. The label is problematic because there are no essential or "fundamental" beliefs for an atheist to be "fundamentalist" about. So why do people use the label? Why do so many people feel that the label is appropriate? This seems to be mostly due to misunderstandings about and prejudice against fundamentalism.

If fundamentalism is primarily about the promotion of "fundamental" beliefs, it's not possible for this to be applied to atheism because atheism has no beliefs, much less "fundamental" beliefs.

a fundamentally mysterious reality

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:11:09 GMT

clipped by: edwincdale
clipper's remarks: This Identifies my own feelings but it does not justify going out and joining a religion, praising or worshiping a deity or supporting those who attempt to force such behavior on the rest of us. The universe is a fundamentally mysterious reality; so leave me alone already!

Clip Source: www.religiondispatches.org

The truth is much more involved. First of all, even if the traditional arguments for God’s existence fail to show that a personal loving creator exists, they might show something more modest—for example, that in order to explain the universe we encounter in ordinary experience, we need to posit the existence of a fundamentally mysterious reality beyond the empirical world. Just because an argument doesn’t take us all the way to God doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant to the case for theism.

Tags: religion, deities

What's the Difference?

Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:42:31 GMT

clipped by: AtlLiberal
clipper's remarks: cont.,

Once it is understood that atheism is merely the absence of belief in any gods, it becomes evident that agnosticism is not, as many assume, a “third way” between atheism and theism. The presence of a belief in a god and the absence of a belief in a god exhaust all of the possibilities. Agnosticism is not about belief in god but about knowledge — it was coined originally to describe the position of a person who could not claim to know for sure if any gods exist or not.

Clip Source: atheism.about.com

Atheism vs. Agnosticism

Question:
If atheism is just disbelief in gods, then what is the difference between that and agnosticism?

Response:
Many people who adopt the label of agnostic reject the label of atheist — there is a common perception that agnosticism is a more “reasonable” position while atheism is more “dogmatic,” ultimately indistinguishable from theism except in the details. Is this a valid position to take?

Unfortunately, no — agnostics may sincerely believe it and theists may sincerely reinforce it, but it relies upon more than one misunderstanding about both atheism and agnosticism. These misunderstandings are only exacerbated by continual social pressure and prejudice against atheism and atheists. People who are unafraid of stating that they indeed do not believe in any gods are still despised in many places, whereas “agnostic” is perceived as more respectable.

Britain's (and America's) Secret Religion--Deism

Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:11:30 GMT

clipped by: blueridge
clipper's remarks: This recent article begins with "the world's most famous atheist" becoming a Deist, i.e. Professor Antony Flew. The reason was this:

New scientific discoveries persuaded him, he said, “that intelligence must have been involved” in producing life.

In other words, natural reason necessitates belief in a Creator. But the article goes on to describe the difference between Deism, Atheism, and Theism.

Any discerning reading (contrary to modern Christian attempts) of America's founders and documents absolute supports that they were not Christians, but Deists, whom, like Thomas Paine, sometimes quoted the Bible, but denied its historical trustworthiness and inspiration, and denied miracles recorded, etc..

It appears Deism is likely to be revived as natural "intelligent design" (which is Deistic, but anti-scriptural philosophy) is made popular and too difficult to deny. Deism is incompatible with Christianity but compatible with Freemasonry, like the Founders.

Clip Source: attachment

Britain’s hidden religion

Published 09 April 2009

US founding father Benjamin Franklin was a deist

Deists believe in a god who created but does not intervene in the universe. That god, however, does not have to be anything more than an entity that set creation in motion.

from the Enlightenment onwards, the influence of deism has been vast. Many of America’s Founding Fathers, including Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, were deists, as were the philosophers Rousseau and Voltaire and the English radical pamphleteer Tom Paine.

Theirs was that of a natural religion, one that was not revealed to Middle Eastern prophets but could be arrived at by reason. The laws of nature must have been designed, goes the argument, hence there must be a designer, and the concept of natural rights (which so permeates the United States constitution) is embodied in his creation.

Any belief in scriptural authenticity or an afterlife is not entailed

Benjamin Franklin was typical

Britain’s hidden religion

Tags: deism, christianity, atheism, theism, intelligent design, freemasonry, america, britain

"Newton Day" In America?

Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:48:53 GMT

clipped by: merrie
clipper's remarks: as the father of modern philosophy, but since logic and philosophy are not so uniquely Western as science, I’ll let it pass.

The real giant of modern Western science, in my mind, is Sir Isaac Newton, whose articulation of the laws of gravitation and motion, and subsequent derivation of Kepler’s laws of planetary motion from those laws, demonstrated that the heavens and the earth all obeyed the same physical laws. While we’re celebrating his contribution, though, we should probably remember Kepler who went before him, and also Galileo Galilei, whose painstaking observation Stephen Hawking believes contributed more to the creation of the modern, natural sciences than anybody else.

So, why are we not celebrating Newton Day, Galileo Day, Kepler Day, Copernicus Day, or Augustine Day?

It’s because the day we’re being told to celebrate is actually a religious observance by a non-theistic religion, and what they’re celebrating is neither science nor reason.

Clip Source: www.plumbbobblog.com

Feb 12 used to be celebrated in America as Abraham Lincoln’s birthday, but that’s become passé. In its place, some schools and communities have designated Feb 12 as, in their description, “a global celebration of science and reason.” Amen, say I; science is a good thing, and reason a better one. I’m a Christian; to me, both science and reason reflect the glory of God, and I have a personal commitment to improve my grasp of both.

So, encouraged by the sentiment and recognizing the positive impact science has made on Western civilization, I drew on my knowledge of science history and selected a few of the true founders of Western science that we really should celebrate.

Nicolaus Copernicus was probably the earliest of the scientists I selected

I suppose I could have mentioned early, influential Western logicians, like St. Augustine (4th century) who was probably first to develop an objective point of view outside of himself, or Thomas Aquinas (13th century) who is widely regarded

Tags: science/reason, copernicus, st augustine, thomas aquinas, newton, darwin, hawkings, theism, humanism

Pantheism

Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:49:25 GMT

clipped by: boniface

Clip Source: pespmc1.vub.ac.be

Pantheism is the philosophy that everything is God (pan="everything" theos="God") or that the universe and nature are divine

Strict pantheism is not a theism. It does not believe in a transcendent or personal God who is the creator of the universe and the judge of humans.

This form of pantheism is identical with movements variously called religious atheism, affirmative atheism, Monism, or Cosmism. It is also very close to Taoism, some forms of Chinese and Japanese Buddhism, and neo- Confucianism.

There are other forms of pantheism. Modern pagans frequently claim to be pantheists. Those who are concerned with logical consistency regard their various deities as symbolic rather than real. Those who are not so concerned combine pantheism with literal polytheism and belief in magic, reincarnation and other supernatural phenomena.

Raving Theist Again

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 05:46:42 GMT

clipped by: Efrain Alvarado

Clip Source: www.splendoroftruth.com

[Video]

Tags: atheism, theism, christianity

The Raving Former Atheist

Wed, 31 Dec 2008 05:44:25 GMT

clipped by: Efrain Alvarado

Clip Source: ravingatheist.com

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

Tags: atheism, theism, christianity

Raving Theist

Tue, 30 Dec 2008 05:03:46 GMT

clipped by: Efrain Alvarado

Clip Source: www.splendoroftruth.com

The Raving Atheist announce he was now the Raving Theist in a post "Christ is Lord". Three years ago he appeared in the atheist documentary "The God Who Wasn't There" and so at first blush many might think this was a hoax. Especially since last year on April Fools another person who was part of the same documentary released a video singing a Christian praise song. Some of his friends such as Dawn Eden vouch for him on this and I believe that this is no joke.

P.Z. Myers (Biologist and Eucharist Desecrater) who use to be on the Raving Atheists forums had this response "Another mind poisoned".

Though this is a concept that Myers and others are not enough of a "freethinker" to be able to see. His is the stereotype world where every Christian is a dumb ass fundamentalist with not brain. His world can not admit an intellect like Pope Benedict XVI or the Catholic intellects throughout history both theologically and scientifically.

Tags: atheism, theism, christianity

The Incoherence of Atheism, Part 3

Thu, 11 Dec 2008 04:54:50 GMT

clipped by: Efrain Alvarado

Clip Source: catholicexchange.com

There are, according to St. Thomas, only two arguments against the existence of God.

The first, translated into modern lingo, means: "Bad stuff happens, so God doesn't exist." The second says, "Everything seems to work fine without God, so He's not there."

atheists try to use not only the materialist argument that "Nature causes Mind", but also the moralist argument that evil exists and that, furthermore, its greatest source is theism itself. Atheist literature is thick with denunciations of the moral evils of theism and with appeals to abandon this enslaving priestcraft for the liberating heights of Reason. In short, atheism tends not only to assume that reason is intrinsically free, it assumes reason can be freely and even perversely misused by cunning religionists.

They also blame theists for doing bad things in ways they do not blame other creatures. Tapeworms and televangelists both exploit other creatures, but atheists only blame the televangelists.

Tags: atheism