Uh, no. Didn't I say that?

It's one of the most prominent mind-control cults in the world today.

Could be that's why I never heard of it.

John Travolta and Tom Cruise are scientologists;

Didn't Cruise just dump Kidman? John Travolta is the worst piece of fake crap actor I've ever seen.

The film BATTLEFIELD EARTH was based on a novel by this wacky SF writer/religious nut Hubbard.

Someone else tried to explain this to me after I saw the film, but since I refuse to believe there is anything like a "mind-control" cult thingie there, I just laughed. I still don't get the film, and it was without a doubt the worst piece of trash ever created.

I'd like to respond to some of your other points, but I don't want you to get pissed off at me!

Hmpf, well whatever...

I don't know what 'Hmpf' means, but for the sake of other readers of this thread, let me respond to Jack's earlier remarks--

'Is that what atheism is? A total rejection of what's staring us right in our conscious faces?'

Since you don't specify what is staring you in the face, I can't respond. Atheism is a rejection of unverifiable claims that supernatural beings and phenomena exist.

'Sure, it could be a colossal accident, some big extrapolation and juxtaposition of events that allow this planet and our living to take place.'

Although scientific theories of the origin of life posit the chance coming together of elements, Darwin's theory of natural selection is not based on the supposition that the complexity of human life is completely accidental.

'How you would take comfort in that is beyond me, I find no peace there.'

I don't select what I believe to be true based on how comfortable it makes me feel. If I did that, I'd no doubt believe that donuts and chocolate milkshakes were the most nutritious foods in the world. I believe something because of evidence and reason. Donuts are fattening. Religious hokum is a waste of time.

'Makes me run screaming, hands over ears, actually.'

That's an interesting response. I'd be interested to know why that is.

'What gives me comfort is the idea that we are creating and evolving for some greater purpose.'

As an atheist, I invent my own purpose. It is my own, and I have a choice whether or not to pursue it. If it is a 'greater' purpose in the sense that it is shared by other people, so much the better, but it is always my choice to embrace that purpose or reject it.

If you believe that your life is serving some purpose that hasn't been revealed to you, I can't see how that would be the source of any comfort whatsoever! What if it turned out that this 'purpose' was really, really dumb?

'Native American rhetoric has it that by 2016 (plus or minus) we will have completed the shift to a "consciousness based reality", many aspects of which are already beginning to emerge into the greater conciousness we all share.'

As an atheist, I am entirely skeptical of concept of shared consciousness. Claims of mental telepathy have frequently been tested and never verified (despite claims to the contrary by researchers like Samuel Soal, Honorton with the 'ganzfeld' research, and Rupert Sheldrake with his 'being stared at' experiments.)

'I'm not disputing your assertion there is no god, you could very well be right. We humans are clumsy at identifying the unknown, however, and something is going on.'

The best technique ever invented for exploring the unknown is the scientific method. I don't think it's clumsy at all.

Not to upset anyone or anything, but Joe's basically got it all figured out correctly. None of what he says contradicts any of the truths that I try to make evident, and his thinking on these matters carries the weight of clarity.

Joe,
I just started reading this topic and I'm not done but I had to post a correction.
There is no way you could possibly know if I fear death. Anyone who knows me knows that while I am in no hurry for my death to get here, I have no fear of death. I fear no man.

Jim Brocius

And now read all the posts here, I have a quetion.
Why is it that so many seemingly otherwise intelligent people assume that God is supernatural? Why do they have trouble accepting the concept that perhaps God knows more about science than they can ever hope to?

Jim Brocius

Jim-- Everybody is different, Jim, and I have no idea to what degree you possess the fear of death. However, the typical person has a fear of death, which is why it usually pretty effective to point a loaded gun at somebody when you're trying to get them to cooperate by handing over their wallet.

The saying, 'There are no atheists in foxholes,' is an acknowledgement by the religious that eternal life in heaven is a motivation for people to be religious. Of course the saying isn't true, so maybe they're wrong about the motivation.

To answer your question, I dismiss the concept that God knows something about science for the simple reason that I don't think God exists. If you believe in a God that is not supernatural, I'd be interested to hear your description of this deity. The various Gods I have heard about are all supernatural, and I don't think most people who believe in them would argue otherwise.

Even if your concept of God is no different in any way from my concept of the natural world, I would still object to the use of the term 'God' to describe it. I think it's bad for children to hear grownups expressing a belief in God!

I would suggest that atheism is spirituality.

Darwin did what, show the intent of the thread of life, don't you think?

It's interesting that "god" would have to "manifest" in order for you to believe.

So what was Jesus? Buddha? Ghandi?

Telepathy has nothing to do with spirituality. These aren't fork bendings or parlor tricks I'm talking about, this is evidence that there is a conciousness based reality that we have co-existed in that we are just beginning to discover..to "see".

I don't know what that has to do with God, or even what god is, or even if there is one. That isn't my concern. The "specialness" of being alive and concious however, it just feels cynical to assume that there are billions of us little sparks running around meaninglessly, and then poof, gone.

What about "individual cellular conciousness"? That's not conceptual, that's been proven "scientifically".

'I would suggest that atheism is spirituality.'

With all due respect, that is a logical contradiction, and frankly, nonsense. It's like saying churchgoers are agnostics, or that ballplayers are giant purple-colored grasshoppers.

'Darwin did what, show the intent of the thread of life, don't you think?'

Darwin did exactly the opposite. The theory of natural selection demonstrated that no 'intent' was necessary to explain the fossil evidence of the evolution of species.

'It's interesting that "god" would have to "manifest" in order for you to believe.

So what was Jesus? Buddha? Ghandi?'

I don't know whether Jesus or Buddha were actual men or entirely mythical. As for Ghandi, he was a political leader in India, and I don't recall anyone ever claiming he was a manifestation of God. In fact, he was assasinated by a religious fanatic in 1948!

'Telepathy has nothing to do with spirituality. These aren't fork bendings or parlor tricks I'm talking about, this is evidence that there is a conciousness based reality that we have co-existed in that we are just beginning to discover..to "see".'

What 'evidence' are you referring to?

'I don't know what that has to do with God, or even what god is, or even if there is one. That isn't my concern. The "specialness" of being alive and concious however, it just feels cynical to assume that there are billions of us little sparks running around meaninglessly, and then poof, gone.'

The term 'cynical' has quite a history behind it, but I assume you mean 'inclined to question the sincerity and goodness of people's motives and actions, or the value of living; morose, sarcastic, sneering, etc.' (from Webster's.)

There is an element of cynicism and even bitterness in the writings of some atheists. But atheism does not need to be a cause for despare, and I certainly don't feel that way.

In fact, secular humanist philosophers and activists are deeply moral people with a positive vision and philosophy. This is nowhere better expressed than in the Humanist Manifesto 2000: http://www.secularhumanism.org/manifesto/index.htm

'What about "individual cellular conciousness"? That's not conceptual, that's been proven "scientifically".'

I don't know what you're referring to.

jack said:

Jack, where did you read or hear this?

------------------
Rick Veitch
Invites You To Read THE DAILY RARE BIT FIENDS
updated every day along with news of the world's most popular artform!
THE COMICON.COM DAILY SPLASHis always refreshing!
www.comicon.com/splash

I believe in science to the extent that there is a scientific explanation for everything God has done. Most people I have spoken with who do not believe in God think along the lines that the feats ascribed to Him are "supernatural" or "magical" much in the way that a person in colonial times might have looked upon seeing an airplane supernatural or magical (or any other number of scientific devices we have).
I think that there is a scientific explanation for all that God does and our current knowledge of science is far exceeded by His.
Also, on another note, I've had guns pointed at me and it never scared me (even once when the trigger got pulled). Maybe you should give up on the "afraid of death" scenario you use as part of your justification for your not believing in God.

Jim Brocius