Atheism is the believe that something came out of nothing and we're all going nowhere

[edthecynic]

“A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.”

- Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[ding]

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Hmmmm... actually space time had a beginning. We know this because of the 2nd Law of thermodynamics and the general theory of relativity. What started it is beyond science. What happened after it can be studied. Those studies show that the universe started in a hot dense state that occupied the space of “roughly a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom.” All of the models show this. Every single one. Why? Because that is what fits the observable data so all of the models model to this. That's called history matching. Now some people will try to claim that it is a cyclical process, but that is bullshit because the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics tells us that the universe cannot be infinite because as time approaches infinity, usable energy approaches zero. Now this does not mean the 1st Law of Thermodynamics is violated. Why? Because just because there is no more usable energy that does not mean that that energy is not accounted for. It is accounted for. It is still in the material balance. It just means everything is at the same temperature. So what we know is this... Matter evolved from subatomic particles into beings that know and create and the universe became self aware. The potential for this existed at the beginning. It occurred as a result of the laws of nature which came into existence when space and time were created. In effect beings that know and create were predestined the moment space and time came into existence.

 

[ding]

That's interesting. I just quoted the assessment of the ideological founder of Communism -- as close as you can get to the "facts" of the relationship between Communism and atheism, and you reply by quoting someone's opinion.

That's not to say that Solzhenitsyn didn't have extraordinary knowledge of the Soviet Union. But as your most recent quote demonstrates, he had his own ideological axe to grind with regard to God. So one must take his observations in light of his theological bias.

That said, let's recall that your original assertion was that "...militant atheism leads to communism..." Even if you had demonstrated that atheism and Communism were inextricably linked -- and, in light of my own quotes, you haven't -- it still doesn't follow that the former leads to the latter, any more than being a Roman Catholic leads to the atrocities of Adolph Hitler (a practicing believer).

Seriously? That's all you think I showed? Really?

 

[Paladin_]

Yes, you simply quoted the opinion of someone with an obvious ideological axe to grind. Then again, you posted so many comments before I had a chance to respond, that I may have honestly missed something in there...

 

[ding]

Yes, you simply quoted the opinion of someone with an obvious ideological axe to grind. Then again, you posted so many comments before I had a chance to respond, that I may have honestly missed something in there...

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

 

[Paladin_]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Can you name one communist state that wasn't an atheist state?

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Is communism based on a dialectical materialist worldview?

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Did Solzhenitsyn explain how communism is based on materialism?

 

[Paladin_]

Can you name one communist state that wasn't an atheist state?

You really like going 'round and 'round, don't you? I admonish you for failing to understand the difference between correlation and causation, and your response is to keep trying to prove correlation.

Suddenly, I'm reminded of that scene from "Cool Hand Luke," where the warden proclaims, "...some men, you just can't reach..."

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Did Vladimir Lenin state that a Marxist must be an enemy of religion, one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way?

 

[ding]

Can you name one communist state that wasn't an atheist state?

You really like going 'round and 'round, don't you? I admonish you for failing to understand the difference between correlation and causation, and your response is to keep trying to prove correlation.

Suddenly, I'm reminded of that scene from "Cool Hand Luke," where the warden proclaims, "...some men, you just can't reach..."

It seems that there are some people who must be walked through things before they will accept the incongruity of their position. You are one of them.

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Did Chinese communist leader Zhou Enlai declare, "We Communists are atheists?"

 

[edthecynic]

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Hmmmm... actually space time had a beginning. We know this because of the 2nd Law of thermodynamics and the general theory of relativity. What started it is beyond science. What happened after it can be studied. Those studies show that the universe started in a hot dense state that occupied the space of “roughly a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom.” All of the models show this. Every single one. Why? Because that is what fits the observable data so all of the models model to this. That's called history matching. Now some people will try to claim that it is a cyclical process, but that is bullshit because the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics tells us that the universe cannot be infinite because as time approaches infinity, usable energy approaches zero. Now this does not mean the 1st Law of Thermodynamics is violated. Why? Because just because there is no more usable energy that does not mean that that energy is not accounted for. It is accounted for. It is still in the material balance. It just means everything is at the same temperature. So what we know is this... Matter evolved from subatomic particles into beings that know and create and the universe became self aware. The potential for this existed at the beginning. It occurred as a result of the laws of nature which came into existence when space and time were created. In effect beings that know and create were predestined the moment space and time came into existence.

Space and time had a beginning, but not energy, therefore since energy IS something there always was something and there always will be something. Claiming that space and time had a beginning does not prove energy had a beginning.

Kinetic energy is the energy of motion, it is a usable energy that can do work. You were very slick to first claim that usable "approaches" zero, but then you lied and said that there is "no more usable energy." So you contradict yourself with your very slick lie. Furthermore, as long as there is motion, then there will never be "zero" usable energy and the Third Law of Thermodynamics says that there is no temperature at which all motion stops. Interesting that you never mentioned the TLoT!!!!!

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Did Zhou Weiqun, chairman of the Committee on Ethnic and Religious Affairs reaffirm in 2014 that that the party’s official adherence to militant atheism has not changed.

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Do you not understand that dialectical materialist worldview is the antithesis of a spiritual worldview?

 

[ding]

Let's see. I have provided you with the fact that history has recorded that there has never been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheistic state. Not one. I have provided statements from Russian and Chinese leaders that militant atheism is required for communism. I have explained why militant atheism is required for communism. I have provided expert witness testimony that lived through it, and I have shown how they all corroborate one another that militant atheism leads to communism. So if you want to claim that all I have done is quoted an opinion of someone with an ideological axe to grind, that is your mistake to make.

No, what you provided to me was quotes from Solzhenitsyn -- who, as I correctly noted earlier, had a theological axe to grind, from Lenin -- who claimed that Marxists must oppose religion (anti-theism, NOT atheism, as I noted earlier), and from Chinese leaders (a pseudo-capitalist country that has become "communist" in name only).

You also claimed that "...ever (sic) single communist regime been an atheistic regime rule by militant atheistic rulers..." Once I provided evidence to the contrary (in the case of Stalin), you seemed to simply ignore that one.

You also seem to ignore my reminder that Marx himself -- the ideological FOUNDER of communism -- stated explicitly that socialism (the precursor to communism) has no need for atheism.

In the end, you STILL haven't -- despite your claim -- demonstrated that atheism "leads to Communism!" You don't seem to comprehend the difference between correlation and cause and effect, and I honestly don't how many different ways I can explain it to you.

Did you not understand the explanation for why a dialectical materialist worldview rather than a spiritual worldview leads to communism. This is the causation you have been seeking. How in the world can you ignore the fact that every single communist state has been an atheist state. The communist leaders explained the causation. Expert witnesses explained the causation. What more do you need?

 

[ding]

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Hmmmm... actually space time had a beginning. We know this because of the 2nd Law of thermodynamics and the general theory of relativity. What started it is beyond science. What happened after it can be studied. Those studies show that the universe started in a hot dense state that occupied the space of “roughly a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom.” All of the models show this. Every single one. Why? Because that is what fits the observable data so all of the models model to this. That's called history matching. Now some people will try to claim that it is a cyclical process, but that is bullshit because the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics tells us that the universe cannot be infinite because as time approaches infinity, usable energy approaches zero. Now this does not mean the 1st Law of Thermodynamics is violated. Why? Because just because there is no more usable energy that does not mean that that energy is not accounted for. It is accounted for. It is still in the material balance. It just means everything is at the same temperature. So what we know is this... Matter evolved from subatomic particles into beings that know and create and the universe became self aware. The potential for this existed at the beginning. It occurred as a result of the laws of nature which came into existence when space and time were created. In effect beings that know and create were predestined the moment space and time came into existence.

Space and time had a beginning, but not energy, therefore since energy IS something there always was something and there always will be something. Claiming that space and time had a beginning does not prove energy had a beginning.

Kinetic energy is the energy of motion, it is a usable energy that can do work. You were very slick to first claim that usable "approaches" zero, but then you lied and said that there is "no more usable energy." So you contradict yourself with your very slick lie. Furthermore, as long as there is motion, then there will never be "zero" usable energy and the Third Law of Thermodynamics says that there is no temperature at which all motion stops. Interesting that you never mentioned the TLoT!!!!!

I don't believe I contradicted myself, but I am fairly slick, lol. What I wrote is that the universe had a beginning (i.e. space and time). What happened before that is unknown as the equations fittingly yield infinities. Science can make no statement about what happened before that point including the one you are trying to make; that energy did not have a beginning. No one knows anything about the universe until it reaches the mature age of a billion of a trillionth of a second after it began to expand and cool. Professor Leon, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate, explains it thusly,

"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential. A story logically begins at the beginning, but this story is about the universe and unfortunately there are no data for the very beginnings--none, zero. We don't know anything about the universe until it reaches the mature age of a billion of a trillionth of a second. That is, some very short time after creation in the big bang. When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up--we are in the realm of philosophy."

I don't know if energy did or did not have a beginning. No one knows that. Are you basing your belief that energy did not have a beginning based on the laws of physics which break down at the singularity?

Maybe it would help if I provided the source of my belief that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics precludes an infinite universe. Would that help?



See the 4 minute mark.

 

[Paladin_]

Ding, do you always post multiple comments before someone has the chance to reply to the first? That's quite aggravating (and a bit dishonest).

It seems that there are some people who must be walked through things before they will accept the incongruity of their position. You are one of them.

Indeed, there ARE some people who must be "walked through things before they will accept the incongruity of their position." And, with your inability to understand the difference between correlation and causation, you've demonstrated that quite adequately.

All you've demonstrated with your numerous quotes is that a number of communist leaders felt that atheism was necessary for a communist state. And NONE of them referred to any causative link between atheism and communism.

What you've utterly FAILED to demonstrate is that atheism LEADS to communism -- which is what you asserted in your very first comment (and, incidentally, "dialectical materialism" is NOT a synonym for atheism).

You can continue to insist that you've proven your initial premise, but you haven't.

 

[ding]

Ding, do you always post multiple comments before someone has the chance to reply to the first? That's quite aggravating (and a bit dishonest).

It seems that there are some people who must be walked through things before they will accept the incongruity of their position. You are one of them.

Indeed, there ARE some people who must be "walked through things before they will accept the incongruity of their position." And, with your inability to understand the difference between correlation and causation, you've demonstrated that quite adequately.

All you've demonstrated with your numerous quotes is that a number of communist leaders felt that atheism was necessary for a communist state. What you've utterly FAILED to demonstrate is that atheism LEADS to communism -- which is what you asserted in your very first comment (and, incidentally, "dialectical materialism" is NOT a synonym for atheism).

You can continue to insist that you've proven your initial premise, but you haven't.

Reply to each of them individually.