태그 아카이브: atheism

하나님의 말씀

성경은 하나님의 말씀으로 간주됩니다. 당신은 나 같은 무신론자 경우, 당신은 모든 단어가 남성에서 온 것을 알고있다. 하나님은 말씀이 없습니다. 이이 말을 쓴 사람에 대한 흥미로운 질문을 제기. 왜 그들은 의미 않았다 (또는 플랫 아웃 말) 그들은 하나님의 말씀을 발언 한 것을?

계속 읽기

하나님 — A Personal Story

I want to wrap up this series on atheism with a personal story about the point in time where I started diverging from the concept of God. I was very young then, about five years old. I had lost a pencil. It had just slipped out of my schoolbag, which was nothing more than a plastic basket with open weaves and a handle. When I realized that I had lost the pencil, I was quite upset. I think I was worried that I would get a scolding for my carelessness. 당신이 볼, my family wasn’t rich. We were slightly better off than the households in our neighborhood, but quite poor by any global standards. The new pencil was, 나에게, a prized possession.

계속 읽기

The Origins of Gods

The atheist-theist debate boils down to a simple question — Did humans discover God? 또는, did we invent Him? The difference between discovering and inventing is the similar to the one between believing and knowing. Theist believe that there was a God to be discovered. Atheists “알고” that we humans invented the concept of God. Belief and knowledge differ only slightly — knowledge is merely a very very strong belief. A belief is considered knowledge when it fits in nicely with a larger worldview, which is very much like how a hypothesis in physics becomes a theory. While a theory (such as Quantum Mechanics, 예를 들어) is considered to be knowledge (or the way the physical world really is), it is best not to forget the its lowly origin as a mere hypothesis. My focus in this post is the possible origin of the God hypothesis.

계속 읽기

Atheism and Unreal God

The only recourse an atheist can have against this argument based on personal experience is that the believer is either is misrepresenting his experience or is mistaken about it. I am not willing to pursue that line of argument. I know that I am undermining my own stance here, but I would like to give the theist camp some more ammunition for this particular argument, and make it more formal.

계속 읽기

Atheism vs. God Experience

I have a reason for delaying this post on the fifth and last argument for God by Dr. William Lane Craig. It holds more potency than immediately obvious. While it is easy to write it off because it is a subjective, experiential argument, the lack of credence we attribute to subjectivity is in itself a result of our similarly subjective acceptance of what we consider objective reason and rationality. I hope that this point will become clearer as you read this post and the next one.

계속 읽기

Atheism and the Morality of the Godless

In the previous post, we considered the cosmological argument (that the Big Bang theory is an affirmation of a God) and a teleological argument (that the highly improbable fine-tuning of the universe proves the existence of intelligent creation). We saw that the cosmological argument is nothing more than an admission of our ignorance, although it may be presented in any number of fancy forms (such as the cause of the universe is an uncaused cause, which is God, 예를 들어). The teleological argument comes from a potentially wilful distortion of the anthropic principle. The next one that Dr. Craig puts forward is the origin of morality, which has no grounding if you assume that atheism is true.

계속 읽기

Atheism – Christian God, or Lack Thereof

교수. William Lane Craig is way more than a deist; he is certainly a theist. 사실, he is more than that; he believes that God is as described in the scriptures of his flavor of Christianity. I am not an expert in that field, so I don’t know exactly what that flavor is. But the arguments he gave do not go much farther than the deism. He gave five arguments to prove that God exists, and he invited Hitchens to refute them. Hitchens did not; 적어도, not in an enumerated and sequential fashion I plan to do here.

계속 읽기

Atheism – Is There a God?

최근에, I have been listening to some debates on atheism by Christopher Hitchens, as recommended by a friend. Although I agree with almost everything Hitchens says (said rather, because he is no longer with us), I find his tone bit too flippant and derisive for my taste, much like The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. I am an atheist, as those who have been following my writings may know. Given that an overwhelming majority of people do believe in some sort of a supreme being, at times I feel kind of compelled to answer the question why I don’t believe in one.

계속 읽기

당신은 하나님을 믿는가?

예전에이 질문에 대한 문제가있어. 그녀는 너무 개인적인 것을 느꼈기 때문에 나는 질문을하는 사람은 화가. 그래서 나는 당신이 하나님을 믿지 여부를 물어 않을거야. 말하지 마 — 나는 당신을 말할 것이다! 또한이 글의 뒷부분에서 당신의 성격에 대해 조금 더 말할 것이다.

확인, 여기에 거래입니다. 당신은 아래의 퀴즈를. 그것은 이상이 40 당신의 습관과 버릇에 대한 true 또는 false 질문. 당신은 그 대답하면, 나는 당신이 하나님을 믿지 여부를 알려줍니다, 만약 그렇다면, 얼마나. 당신은 말 이후 지루해하는 경우 20 질문 정도, 그것은 괜찮습니다, you can quit the quiz and get the Rate. 그러나 더 많은 질문은 대답, 당신의 믿음에 대한보다 정확한 내 생각이 될 것입니다.


Once you have your Score (또는 Rate, 당신이 퀴즈를 완료하지 않은 경우), 여기에 해당하는 버튼을 클릭합니다.

& NBSP; & NBSP; & NBSP; & NBSP; & NBSP;

여기 그것이 작동하는 방법이다. 우리의 뇌에서 일어나는 노동의 한 부문이있다, 뇌 기능의 반구 전문화 이론에 따르면. 이 이론에, 뇌의 왼쪽 반구는 논리적이고 분석적인 사고의 기원으로 간주됩니다, 오른쪽 반구는 창조적이고 직관적 인 사고의 근원이다. 소위 좌측 뇌 선형 인 것으로 생각된다, 논리, 분석, 그리고 냉정한; 오른쪽 뇌 사람은 공간이 될 것으로 생각된다, 창조, 신비, 직관적, 감정적.

반구 전문이 개념은 흥미로운 질문을 제기: 무신론 논리 반구 관련된? 덜 감정적 무신론자입니다? 난 그렇게 생각, 이 테스트는 믿음에 기초. 당신이 있는지 여부 퀴즈 테스트 “왼쪽 뇌” 사람. 당신은 점수가 높은 경우, 왼쪽 뇌가 지배, 당신은 직관적 인 창조적보다 더 많은 분석과 논리적 될 가능성이. 그리고, 내 추측에 따라, 당신은 무신론자 될 가능성이. 그것은 당신을 위해 작동 했나?

음, 그것은하지 않았다하더라도, 지금 당신은 당신이 분석하거나 직관적 여부를 알. 그것이 어떻게 작동하는지 나에게 알려 코멘트를 남겨주세요.

[이 포스팅은 내 책에서 편집 한 발췌 한 것입니다 언리얼 우주]

사진 : 말씀을 기다리는