Sentences with phrase «of atheism since»

just sayin: Prof. Dawkins (not high priest of atheism since it's a lack of belief, hence no dogmas, creed, etc) would probably accept that Jesus was myth if presented the case from those biblical authors.

How many wars have been started in the name of atheism since then?

Not exact matches

Since it apparently needs clarification, my intent was not to include atheism as a religious group, but to speak to the vast number of atheists that treat it as such.

Theists are so pathetic, since they can't compete against the logic and reason of atheism, they try to drag in down to the level of religion

Agnosticism is just a step in the direction of Atheism, it does not have the high ground since it gives equal credibility to belief and no belief in religion... they are not equal.

If as you say you have talked to others who claim to be Atheist the way you describe it then they are IDIOTS who also don't understand Atheism and yes at that point since they are claiming «no God» to be true, then by all means call their point of view a «religion».

Since Atheism is the absence of religion & isn't based on faith this ban only applies to religious groups & churches.

Since I've now demonstrated that Atheism is NOT a belief in «no God» then your entire idea of Atheism is a «religion» falls apart.

But that is actually besides the point since atheism can not be «kept out of» anything.

Since atheism per se takes no stand on the killing of innocent people, when an sociopathic atheist is responsible for the deaths of people, be it one person or a million, it does not represent any kind of inconsistency with his status as an atheist.

Since China's government is not structured around atheism, I hardly see the need to make an issue of it.

Wow, The Catholic Herald has proclaimed «new atheism» (which they made up) to be dead since obviously, atheists can see the everyday benefits of religion.

Both of these examples suggest that atheism often means «disbelief in the God of the establishment,» since those in power typically define the God who is supposed to be believed in.

Since it is five steps away from atheism out of a possible six, lovers of the letter of orthodoxy who might feel inclined to attack case two as little better than atheism, or as a blasphemous or at best a crudely inept doctrine, might pause, before indulging in such judgment, long enough to consider — and I am confident they will not have done so before — what the five steps really mean.

Economics might seem like a poor place to start a Christian fight - back against methodological atheism, since it deals largely with issues that Christians have generally considered of minor importance — the body's daily needs and occupations.

The people have believed in God since the beginning of the world, and then atheism came AFTER that.

Since man is fundamentally orientated towards truth and authentic values, it is to be expected that, for the atheist himself, the meaning of atheism consists more in the truths which it involves than m the errors in which it finds expression; more in the real values which it affirms than in those it denies.

All of your claims that atheism is a religion then, are clearly lies, since there is no definition of religion that you could possibly fit atheism into.

Since the goal of tying atheism to communism can not be achieved factually the religious resort is to subsume or absorb.

«Every single human being who walks on the face of the earth has a lense that they view the world through... Since Evolution / Atheism denies the existence of God and the biblical account of creation, they have to make sense of the fossil record and geologic formations somehow.»

You made the claim they did it in the name of atheism, then shot yourself in the foot with your own cut and pasts, and have ignored that ever since and continued to make the same assertion.

The Church has not developed a proper theology of matter - energy — and this is a major weakness, since modern science is used to promote materialism and atheism.

Since such evidence has never been provided (personal feelings or experiences are NOT empirical evidence), the default stance of any rational person should be atheism.

In truth, religion and atheism have been around, side by side, since the dawn of man.

Quite apart from the mistakes and sins of her own leaders, the Church in Europe in the years since the Enlightenment has faced constant pressure from revolutionary violence, intellectual contempt, ideological atheism, idolatry of the nation state, two disastrous world wars, and mass genocides.

This would explain the ability of the believing scholar to tolerate functional atheism, since the God - question can be left aside because it is answered in advance in favor of the bourgeoisie enterprise.

Anyway, if he still believes in God, then he isn't really an atheist, and will never know what it's like to truly be one, since that is what atheism means — having no belief in any kind of god.

If most of the articles you are reading are in the American media, then most likely the media would pit atheism against Christianity, since it is the dominant religion in the US.

Since his election in March, Francis has delivered sharp and unscripted remarks on everything from homosexuality to atheism to his unlikely election to the seat of St. Peter.

And, snore, since you think of yourself as a great historian, please remind us which «war» Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot started in the name of Atheism?

Since atheism has no such codified belief system, and system of living, as religion does, it is NOT a religion.

Over the years I have learned that it is just easier to do so, since I'm not looking for opportunities to educate my fellow Americans about the joys of atheism; it's just my belief system.

It's unlikely you would ever have a declared atheistic country that actually espoused the values of atheism, since atheism is mere lack of religion.

Had atheism been a capital crime since creation, think of the millions of people who would have lived full lives.

And of course since atheism is Absolute, Complete and Total NONSENSE, the atheists lacks the certainty in a Resurrection, in Eternal Rewards in Heaven and Eternal Punishment in the other Place that IS NOT Heaven.

Faith's negation ultimately results not in atheism but in polytheism, since the continuum of life's journey breaks down, then, into a plethora of diversions through which the idolatry of desire leads necessarily into a labyrinth from which there is no true liberation.

Since it contrasts the views on the bilboards to the alternative of atheism it could be seen as portraying a view in which those were the only two options.

However, it's very questionable (to say the least) that to accept that others can be atheist is a «very extreme transgressions of those [conservative] behaviors», since except for the more extremist most conservative are not for forbidding atheism.