Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the central question regarding religion, in these modern times, is:
Does matter create mind, or does mind create matter?
To me, it's obvious that mind creates matter. And that idea is generally compatible with all religion (not the specific details, but the underlying ideas).
The idea that matter creates mind (materialist philosophy) was never very popular until recently. The discovery of DNA in mid 20th century led biologists to think Darwin's theory can entirely explain evolution. This became the inspiration for the New Atheists.
Richard Dawkins has been a devout crusader for atheism, and against religion.
The beliefs of the New Atheists are actually illogical and unscientific. But of course they don't think so.
I think the central question regarding religion, in these modern times, is:
Does matter create mind, or does mind create matter?
To me, it's obvious that mind creates matter. And that idea is generally compatible with all religion (not the specific details, but the underlying ideas).
The idea that matter creates mind (materialist philosophy) was never very popular until recently. The discovery of DNA in mid 20th century led biologists to think Darwin's theory can entirely explain evolution. This became the inspiration for the New Atheists.
Richard Dawkins has been a devout crusader for atheism, and against religion.
The beliefs of the New Atheists are actually illogical and unscientific. But of course they don't think so.
I think the central question regarding religion, in these modern times, is:
Does matter create mind, or does mind create matter?
o.
Umm, I disagree. The Central question is whether God is real. If God is real then religion is the most important thing. If God is not real than religion is just a thing that is useful, but one can live without it and a big So What.
If mind evolved along with matter, and the origins of life was matter becoming able to replicate, then matter apparently created mind.
New atheism hasn't much to do with Darwinism. New atheism (a term coined by theists rather than atheists) is just the same as the old, except that we are no longer intimidated into not taking about it.
Answer to the main question in the universe was given years ago.
it is 46.
otherwise, answer is - neither. And both. Everything is in primordial Space, that is completely unknown to science. In Space there is Consciousness (aka mind) and Substance.
These three are the Great Trinity of everything, The Great Trimurti.
The Great Trinity is timeless, non physical and has no dimensions.
Everything is in it, comes out of it and goes into it.
Consciousness is the organizing principle of everything. A stir in Consciousness results in Manifestation in Substance. Such manifestation is pyrogen, or unit of fire. That unit is Action, as action is fire primary attribute.
Manifestation results in a unit that becomes Matter.
then process of development follows, in specific phases, until that unit becomes self conscious.
Ultimately, such a unit, that was a unit of nature, then became unit of intelligence, becomes consciousness.
The beliefs of the New Atheists are actually illogical and unscientific.
Well, instead of just claiming that we are 'illogical and unscientific', why don't you explain....
1. why you think we are.
2. where we are wrong.
3. why you are right.
...and whilst you're about that, you could explain just what a 'new' atheist is?
Umm, I disagree. The Central question is whether God is real. If God is real then religion is the most important thing. If God is not real than religion is just a thing that is useful, but one can live without it and a big So What.
I disagree. God IS real and it has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with what God wants from us NOT what some religion THINKS God wants from us.
Oh, but old Snapdragoon, you know that the burden of proof is mere a 'professors' dictum' and invalid where it doesn't suit Mystic. Better to let him and another of the many, many conflicting theists who know it all through faith slug each other into oblivion, while Atheism wins.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 07-02-2017 at 07:11 AM..
Well, instead of just claiming that we are 'illogical and unscientific', why don't you explain....
1. why you think we are.
2. where we are wrong.
3. why you are right.
...and whilst you're about that, you could explain just what a 'new' atheist is?
It's a long explanation and I can't just spit it out in one post. The first point is that Darwin's natural selection idea does not explain evolution, not at all. Natural selection really happens, as anyone can see, but it does not explain why or how life evolved. That is such a profound misunderstanding of modern science, but it has such a grip on their minds they can't see around it.
By "New Atheists" I mean the Richard Dawkins movement, mostly, and his allies.
Intelligent Design was trashed by the progressive materialist science worshipers. But ID was just an attempt to prove that evolution entirely caused by natural selection is impossible.
Evolution happened, there is plenty of evidence for it. Natural selection happens, there is plenty of evidence for it. That's how people get confused, even the experts.
Evolution theory is pretty central to New Atheism. But they also believe in the possibility of real Artificial Intelligence (which we have no evidence for). And they think the brain generates consciousness and thought (no evidence for that either).
New Atheism can seem convincing if you don't look too deeply.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.