Is there such a thing as an atheist?

[Cycel]

Actually, the Bible asserts that 100% have gone astray.

All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way... - Isaiah 53:6

No, not the whole Bible, just Isaiah 53:6, states this, otherwise you can't trust anything that anyone in scripture writes: for each biblical writer has gone astray; each turning to his own way. Is this what you mean to imply? Arguing that everyone has gone astray except for the biblical writers makes for a very biased understanding of scripture.

Wow! Didn't realize you were saying that, did you.

 

[Cycel]

Revelation 21:2
And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Just a thought...

I see a number of biblical quotes, but I have no idea what it is you think they are saying about this most recent ALMA image of a nascent planetary star system.

 

[Cycel]

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. - Ezekiel 18:20

God provided a way out of our guilt. God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but possess eternal life (John 3:16).

I see, and what has this to do with the ALMA image we've been discussing?

 

[nl]

Ah, I see. You won't believe it until we have the technology to actually resolve the individual planets. Never mind that the presence of planets is the best explanation. What else do you think might be clearing those dust lanes, Nl?

This is what the hypothesis predicted we should see, and there it is!


Star system and planetary system are the same thing. Note, for example, that our star system is often called the solar system. The solar system refers exclusively to the Sun and its planets, hence, a star system is any other planetary system. In any case, by saying star system I meant only planetary system. It is not a point worth disputing. It looks to me as though you are searching for anything you might contest.


If you were more familiar with astronomy you would know that that astronomers frequently refer to the evolution of stars, planetary systems, and galaxies. It is a common practice in this field.

OK. I don't want to be picky. Apparently, terminology is such that a stellar system and a planetary system are the same thing. But, then again, people with cars will park on driveways and drive on parkways.

Ok. Dust balls floating around a star don't mean aliens exist and don't mean that God doesn't exist although unbelievers seem ready to jump toward a conclusion like that.

i went look for more information on the star named HL Tau and found this article about a pulsating star: HL Tau 76 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If a star pulsates, then it may freeze you one moment and fry you the next moment if it doesn't poison you with radiation beforehand.

Our sun is nice and steady.

The philosophy of evolution is such that many are ready to apply it outside the realm of biology.

 

[Dan_473]

Mind and will or choice and emotion are in the realm of the metaphysical. Sure, I believe in responsible human free will and choice. Some might argue that we are guided by instinct. Some might argue extreme forms of psychological behavioral determinism like a B. F. Skinner.

We have it in written form as a testimony from earlier generations that Jesus Christ said that we will need to give account for every idle, purposeless word. We have much discretionary choice regarding what to speak and when to speak.

yes, I think so, too... we can make choices.

 

[Dan_473]

I am planning to get a hair cut today. I made a choice not to go yesterday. I was going to do laundry yesterday but then put it off till today. Clearly we all make decisions.

Are you talking about a research claim that says our brains are aware of our decision before we become consciously aware of the decision ourselves?

I've heard of that research, but that's not really what I'm talking about, I don't think...
every particle in the natural world, based on what I understand of physics, which isn't a lot, its motion is either random or deterministic... neither of those things can produce what we normally think of as Choice... at least that I know of... if someone does know a way, I'm interested.

 

[Timeline]

No, not the whole Bible, just Isaiah 53:6, states this, otherwise you can't trust anything that anyone in scripture writes: for each biblical writer has gone astray; each turning to his own way. Is this what you mean to imply? Arguing that everyone has gone astray except for the biblical writers makes for a very biased understanding of scripture.

Wow! Didn't realize you were saying that, did you.

John 11:51
Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation,

Actually, as we see here (and with King Saul) anyone can proclaim the truth, if God so wishes, even if they have gone astray. God can use whomever He choses to speak the truth.

 

[Cycel]

HL Tau 76 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL]

These are two very different stars Nl. HL Tau 76 is a white dwarf, which means it is a very ancient star, in the last stages of its life. The one we've been talking about is a new star, some 4.5 billion years younger than the Sun.

See: HL Tauri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If a star pulsates, then it may freeze you one moment and fry you the next moment if it doesn't poison you with radiation beforehand.

Our sun is nice and steady.

Stars are very different in their make up. The one with the proto-planetary disk is very much like our Sun. By the way, our Sun may one day be like the one in the article you found. Stars change as they age. That is why they are said to evolve.

The philosophy of evolution is such that many are ready to apply it outside the realm of biology.

If the shoe fits, yes, and it does fit with astronomy. If you recognize, as I do, that the universe is billions of years old, then you must also recognize that stars and galaxies go through different stages as they age. How does a star age? It runs out of fuel. It then becomes something different than what it was during its 'main sequence'.

 

[phil112]

These are two very different stars Nl. HL Tau 76 is a white dwarf, which means it is a very ancient star, in the last stages of its life. The one we've been talking about is a new star, some 4.5 billion years younger than the Sun.

See: HL Tauri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Stars are very different in their make up. The one with the proto-planetary disk is very much like our Sun. By the way, our Sun may one day be like the one in the article you found. Stars change as they age. That is why they are said to evolve.


If the shoe fits, yes, and it does fit with astronomy. If you recognize, as I do, that the universe is billions of years old, then you must also recognize that stars and galaxies go through different stages as they age. How does a star age? It runs out of fuel. It then becomes something different than what it was during its 'main sequence'.

Allow me to nit pick here. Since we don't know, just yet, saying "main sequence" may or may not be accurate. How about let's say "most visible sequence"?

 

[nl]

These are two very different stars Nl. HL Tau 76 is a white dwarf, which means it is a very ancient star, in the last stages of its life. The one we've been talking about is a new star, some 4.5 billion years younger than the Sun.

See: HL Tauri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Stars are very different in their make up. The one with the proto-planetary disk is very much like our Sun. By the way, our Sun may one day be like the one in the article you found. Stars change as they age. That is why they are said to evolve.


If the shoe fits, yes, and it does fit with astronomy. If you recognize, as I do, that the universe is billions of years old, then you must also recognize that stars and galaxies go through different stages as they age. How does a star age? It runs out of fuel. It then becomes something different than what it was during its 'main sequence'.

I'm glad to have identification of the correct star now. Thank you for the astronomy lessons. .

 

[Cycel]

Ok. Dust balls floating around a star don't mean aliens exist and don't mean that God doesn't exist although unbelievers seem ready to jump toward a conclusion like that.

Certainly no sentient life forms would have, as yet, had the opportunity to evolve in this system. Though, perhaps, the first bio-chemical life forms have already arisen. Who knows? (I suspect, however, that it may be too early for that.)

But, if life has arisen without God does this disprove God? No, it does not. Just because life can arise without God does not mean there is no God. Even Richard Dawkins would acknowledge that. I think, if you look into it, you will find that many Christians become atheists for reasons that have little to do with science.

I am reading a book titled Caught in the Pulpit, written by Dan Dennett and Linda Lascola. It interviews about 50 ministers who have become either agnostic or atheistic. The interviewees are all members of The Clergy Project (which has some 600 members). Most of these individuals are still in the pulpit, though a few of them have left it behind. I am about half way through the book, but so far not a single individual has cited science as the cause of their loss of faith. You might find it interesting reading.

"The Clergy Project is a confidential online community for current and former religious leaders in vocational ministry who do not hold supernatural beliefs and are struggling with issues.


Launched on March 21st, 2011, it's a safe haven where members can freely discuss the challenges they face on a daily basis being in ministry or on leaving ministry and establishing a new life.


Currently, the community's 600+ Forum Participants rely on each other for support, networking, and discussion about the challenges they face as current or former religious leaders." Clergy Project

Note, in order to post on this site one must be a practicing, or former, member of the clergy, although their testimonials are available for anyone to read.

 

[Kerry]

Certainly no sentient life forms would have, as yet, had the opportunity to evolve in this system. Though, perhaps, the first bio-chemical life forms have already arisen. Who knows? (I suspect, however, that it may be too early for that.)

But, if life has arisen without God does this disprove God? No, it does not. Just because life can arise without God does not mean there is no God. Even Richard Dawkins would acknowledge that. I think, if you look into it, you will find that many Christians become atheists for reasons that have little to do with science.

I am reading a book titled Caught in the Pulpit, written by Dan Dennett and Linda Lascola. It interviews about 50 ministers who have become either agnostic or atheistic. The interviewees are all members of The Clergy Project (which has some 600 members). Most of these individuals are still in the pulpit, though a few of them have left it behind. I am about half way through the book, but so far not a single individual has cited science as the cause of their loss of faith. You might find it interesting reading.

"The Clergy Project is a confidential online community for current and former religious leaders in vocational ministry who do not hold supernatural beliefs and are struggling with issues.


Launched on March 21st, 2011, it's a safe haven where members can freely discuss the challenges they face on a daily basis being in ministry or on leaving ministry and establishing a new life.


Currently, the community's 600+ Forum Participants rely on each other for support, networking, and discussion about the challenges they face as current or former religious leaders." Clergy Project

Note, in order to post on this site one must be a practicing, or former, member of the clergy, although their testimonials are available for anyone to read.

An atheist that loves CC go figure?

 

[nl]

Certainly no sentient life forms would have, as yet, had the opportunity to evolve in this system. Though, perhaps, the first bio-chemical life forms have already arisen. Who knows? (I suspect, however, that it may be too early for that.)

[SUP]

Source: [/SUP]http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amoeba#mediaviewer/File:Amoeba_(PSF).png

Even a single-cell amoeba has remarkable complexities including pre-programmed DNA. Programmed code is basically impossible without a programmer.

I also found this claim that the quantity of DNA is a single cell amoeba is 200 times greater than the amount of DNA in a a human being.

Link: amoeba dubia has 200 tmes more DNA than people

 

[nl]

...

I am reading a book titled Caught in the Pulpit, written by Dan Dennett and Linda Lascola. It interviews about 50 ministers who have become either agnostic or atheistic. The interviewees are all members of The Clergy Project (which has some 600 members). Most of these individuals are still in the pulpit, though a few of them have left it behind. I am about half way through the book, but so far not a single individual has cited science as the cause of their loss of faith. You might find it interesting reading.

"The Clergy Project is a confidential online community for current and former religious leaders in vocational ministry who do not hold supernatural beliefs and are struggling with issues.


Launched on March 21st, 2011, it's a safe haven where members can freely discuss the challenges they face on a daily basis being in ministry or on leaving ministry and establishing a new life.


Currently, the community's 600+ Forum Participants rely on each other for support, networking, and discussion about the challenges they face as current or former religious leaders." Clergy Project

Note, in order to post on this site one must be a practicing, or former, member of the clergy, although their testimonials are available for anyone to read.

The professing church (including preachers in pulpits) includes false professors and hypocrites. Jesus foretold this during multiple events. One was at the Sermon on the Mount (See Matthew 7) and one was near the end of his public ministry and the Parable of the Ten Virgins.

If we take the Parable of the Ten Virgins as a representative model, then the percentage of false professors and hypocrites is around one-half.

Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, who took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.... And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not so...but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. (from Matthew 25:1-10)

 

[Dan_473]

Certainly no sentient life forms would have, as yet, had the opportunity to evolve in this system. Though, perhaps, the first bio-chemical life forms have already arisen. Who knows? (I suspect, however, that it may be too early for that.)

But, if life has arisen without God does this disprove God? No, it does not. Just because life can arise without God does not mean there is no God. Even Richard Dawkins would acknowledge that. I think, if you look into it, you will find that many Christians become atheists for reasons that have little to do with science.

I am reading a book titled Caught in the Pulpit, written by Dan Dennett and Linda Lascola. It interviews about 50 ministers who have become either agnostic or atheistic. The interviewees are all members of The Clergy Project (which has some 600 members). Most of these individuals are still in the pulpit, though a few of them have left it behind. I am about half way through the book, but so far not a single individual has cited science as the cause of their loss of faith. You might find it interesting reading.

"The Clergy Project is a confidential online community for current and former religious leaders in vocational ministry who do not hold supernatural beliefs and are struggling with issues.


Launched on March 21st, 2011, it's a safe haven where members can freely discuss the challenges they face on a daily basis being in ministry or on leaving ministry and establishing a new life.


Currently, the community's 600+ Forum Participants rely on each other for support, networking, and discussion about the challenges they face as current or former religious leaders." Clergy Project

Note, in order to post on this site one must be a practicing, or former, member of the clergy, although their testimonials are available for anyone to read.

I can understand the allure of the non-faith-based life… you can just deal with what you can see or touch… some of the implications, though, like inability to choose, or human life having no special value, I dislike… these lead me to continue dealing with faith…

 

[phil112]

I can understand the allure of the non-faith-based life… you can just deal with what you can see or touch… some of the implications, though, like inability to choose, or human life having no special value, I dislike… these lead me to continue dealing with faith…

Knowing God is, is what leads me to believe. I don't believe because it seems like the better choice. I simply believe truth. It is immutable, so whether or not you prefer it, or an alternative is irrelevant. Because you prefer to value human life over not valuing it isn't reason enough to have faith, imho. I have faith because I know God exists and I know He wants me to live with Him in eternity. Since that means He only wants what is best for me, then that fact is what compels me to follow His advice and commands.

 

[PennEd]

No, not the whole Bible, just Isaiah 53:6, states this, otherwise you can't trust anything that anyone in scripture writes: for each biblical writer has gone astray; each turning to his own way. Is this what you mean to imply? Arguing that everyone has gone astray except for the biblical writers makes for a very biased understanding of scripture.

Wow! Didn't realize you were saying that, did you.

Just Isaiah 53:6 huh?

Romans 3:23King James Version (KJV) [SUP]23 [/SUP]For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God

 

[PennEd]

This poll was taken in Britain! Yet EVEN there they know what the most important, valuable book ever written was.

The Bible voted more valuable to humanity than Darwin's Origin of Species in Folio Society poll - News - Books - The Independent

 

[ColinCat]

I can understand the allure of the non-faith-based life… you can just deal with what you can see or touch… some of the implications, though, like inability to choose, or human life having no special value, I dislike… these lead me to continue dealing with faith…

To me as an atheist, I put MORE value on human life. To an atheist this is The only life we have so we value our own and others' so much more.

 

[Cycel]

I've heard of that research, but that's not really what I'm talking about, I don't think...
every particle in the natural world, based on what I understand of physics, which isn't a lot, its motion is either random or deterministic... neither of those things can produce what we normally think of as Choice... at least that I know of... if someone does know a way, I'm interested.

I don't understand what you are getting at. I do believe, however, that all of our choices originate with our own brain activity, and I do think our choices are our own.