.......the findings he describes lead to one critical conclusion: perhaps it is atheists, not God, who truly do not exist.
Posted on 07/15/2014 9:37:28 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
.......the findings he describes lead to one critical conclusion: perhaps it is atheists, not God, who truly do not exist.
“When a man stops believing in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he believes in global warming.”
ping for later.
New tagline...
William Blackstone:
“Good and wise men, in all ages...have supposed, that the deity, from the relations, we stand in, to himself and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is, indispensably, obligatory upon all mankind, prior to any human institution whatever...This is what is called the law of nature, which, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is, of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries at all times. No human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid, derive all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original.”
Alexander Hamilton:
“Upon this law, depend the natural rights of mankind, the supreme being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which, to discern and pursue such things, as were consistent with his duty and interest, and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety.
“Hence, in a state of nature, no man has any moral power to deprive another of his life, limbs, property, or liberty; nor the least authority to command, or exact obedience from him....
“Hence also, the origin of all civil government, justly established, must be a voluntary compact, between the rulers and the ruled; and must be liable to such limitations, as are necessary for the security of the absolute rights of the latter; for what original title can any man or set of men have, to govern others, except their own consent? To usurp dominion over a people, in their own despite, or to grasp at more extensive power than they are willing to entrust, is to violate that law of nature, which gives every man the right to his personal liberty; and can, therefore, confer no obligation to obedience.”
“When human laws contradict or discountenance the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws, and so become null and void.”
I don’t believe in .atheists.
Most atheists just don’t like God.
Uuuuhhh I think these “scientists” are morons. Plenty of atheists exist that don’t hold any “tacitly religious” idea. None of the atheists I know believe in the soul, partly because we all know if we did we wouldn’t be atheists.
But you are a soul.
If you weren’t you wouldn’t be here.
It’s kinda self-evident.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Maybe in your beliefs. I don’t see a soul here, that’s a religious non-scientific concept that’s unprovable and not useful. So I don’t believe in it, and I’m not interested in it. What’s actually self evident is that mystic beliefs rely on circular logic, another reason I have nothing to do with them.
Kind of like the premise of the American claim to liberty and self-government, right?
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...”
As Christians we believe our souls are our minds, our wills, our emotions, created free, in the image and likeness of God.
What exactly do you think you are if you’re not a soul endowed with a mind, a will, and emotions?
Actually if you throw out the Creator part it still stands pretty well. There’s a self evident truth that people are all roughly equal, should be treated as such, and if you don’t give them a government that treats them well they will eventually over throw you.
Well, there are no dead atheists, that’s for sure...
An accident of stardust...
So... what moral claim could one accident of stardust make on another?
What right would one accident of stardust have to tell another one that it is “wrong”?
No right. No right whatsoever.
Actually, the opposite is true. Throw out "the Creator part" and it crumbles into dust.
You're pretty much proving the article to be correct.
Chemical reactions in an evolved portion of the anatomy makes up the mind and will. Emotions are primarily the result of lower portions of the mind (and even the body, and just genetic code) manipulating higher portions of the mind. The genes want to perpetuate, the body has a whole section devoted entirely to genetic immortality, the lower mind makes us fall in love so that we can acquire a breeding partner.
It’s all pretty straight forward stuff actually. Pretty well explained these days backed up by experimentation, and manipulable through drugs (both with and without supervision). Religions were designed by pre-scientific people to explain things they didn’t understand. But a lot of that stuff is very understandable now. There are identifiable chemical reactions to these things now, we can look at a brain scan and say “this guy is happy, this one is depressed, this one is in the early infatuation stage of love, this one is in the long haul comfortable partner stage”. It ain’t tough, and it ain’t mystical.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.