Just thought I'd throw my oar in. As an atheist, I always thought the word derived from the Greek, a- meaning without and theos meaning god and took it to mean the theory or belief that god, in the biblical sense, does not exist. I believe religion, all denominations, was an invention of the ruling class designed to keep the masses in their place when, millennia ago, we started asking awkward questions like, "Where do we come from?". In answer to the original posting, could atheists explain their theories on the beginning of creation? Yes, we were not created in the sense you have used the word, i.e., by a deity but by a random series of events involving physics, elements etc.
That would have been a much more reasonable question and may I suggest; 'Something caused the universe to exist. What was the cause?' This removes all connection with religion or a mythical creator and opens up the possibilities to more feasable things like chemical reactions, explosions etc.
As i have said consistently nothing is derived from nothing that includes energy I have yet to see something that has come from nothing
oh, and it's ketchup on chips, brown sauce on everything else. A mate of mine used to pour salad cream on his, nasty!!
well if survival of the fittest was true, all children should not make puberty. as is there anything mores susceptible to the elements etc than a baby?
I agree with that, but in my opinion religion was created to give uncivilised people a moral compass before laws were invented. Once laws came into being religion should have died a natural death, but because people are corrupt the churches, temples, mosques and synagogues remained because basically god, heaven and hell are good products and as we all know good products make money.
I mentioned the definition of what god was and said that your definition was implied by your own religion. What do you mean, existed how? Were in existence. A painting needs to be painted, yes. I'll stop you there. You're going with the watchmaker analogy. A theory that's been kicked to death so many times in the past that it's hard to believe that anyone still brings it up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy Yes, it does and I've already shown you that you're wrong about this. Would you like me to link to other sites that'll tell you how wrong you are? No, you didn't. You changed the phrasing completely. See? Atheism would exist, as people wouldn't believe in a god or gods, but nobody would know that they were an atheist. It would be a redundant term. I said that some religions claim that god is unknowable.
Went to Scarborough once as a kid and saw a pregnant woman walk into a chippy and get a bag of chips, then into the corner shop next door and come out with a pot of double-cream. Awful, awful stuff. You, sir, are a veritable dunce.
depends are we looking at when darwin first coined the phrase or beforehand as in Herbert Spencer? I meant from darwin which was a metaphor "better adapted for immediate, local environment" babies should be fubar'd surely?
Yes. Again, a wee crash course in quantum physics would answer most of the questions you keep asking.
based on the dinosaurs and sex bit because it is logical to conclude, unless of course you can name 1 thing that just exists as we know it
Do you eat with your hands? We have spoons, you may deny their existence but they are real as are sporks...
Craig, if it's accepted that the oldest religions of which we are aware of are, say, 7-8,000 years old then I do hope religion was not invented as a moral compass to guide before the invention of laws as that would suggest we were amoral before!! I totally agree that religion should have died a death, I think it's the biggest money spinner on the planet.
I don't know if an unknowable god exists. There are unknowable elements hinted at in quantum physics. So far there's been no suggestion of a god. As for a crash course. Go and study it yourself.
