Atheisms flat earth

a reply to: Raggedyman

You make a fools argument. The absence of religion is NOT religion. Atheist choose not to believe in God because there is no real evidence people can agree on supporting the claim. Unlike science, where many groups of people can independently verify what is found in reality.

Superstition would not exist as a word if it were not real.

a reply to: dfnj2015

A fools argument
Religion is not just the belief or non belief in a God or gods
It's the ritual of life and belief in the unknown

Go score your points somewhere else
Many atheists have their own foolish beliefs, as a many and varied as the religious

a reply to: Raggedyman

Come to think of it the English word planet suggests a flat surface like a plain. Ultimately the Proto Indo-European root *pele- means "to spread out flat". The Greek and Latin words behind terms like "planeta" and "asteres planetai" alludes to wandering stars, origin in Greek is "planasthai" meaning "to wander". The modern word received its current semantics in the 1630s.

==> Source 1
==> Source 2

a reply to: Raggedyman

So, believing in evolution is equatable to atheism? Is that what you're trying to say? Yeah, bull#.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

It is the specious conclusion these folks make, to justify their backward thinking After all "atheists" have killed more people than Christians right? Or only an Atheist supports abortion, and evolution and .... basically throw away statements with out proof

originally posted by: SpeakerofTruth
a reply to: Raggedyman

So, believing in evolution is equatable to atheism? Is that what you're trying to say? Yeah, bull#.

Yeah exactly, I could take out my brain and arrive at that conclusion as well

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It is the specious conclusion these folks make, to justify their backward thinking

After all "atheists" have killed more people than Christians right? Or only an Atheist supports abortion, and evolution and .... basically throw away statements with out proof

Wow noinden, in a strange and absurd like way you are the whole point of this thread, you get it and are it and don't understand why you are the point of the thread, well done you

It's staggeringly incredible and beautiful and bizzare all at the same time

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

But wouldn't we need to understand Hebrew and Aramaic to get a better picture of the etymology
I did once but I think it was inconclusive

a reply to: Raggedyman

Oh I understand your reason for posting this. You are trying to take some heat off of Christianity I've not said Flat Earthers are Christians. IF you could grok anything outside of your narrow range of experiences, you would understand that odd beliefs like flat earth, creationism, faked moon landings etc, are just that. Odd beliefs.

Athiests come in many flavours after all But you were just casting shade

a reply to: Noinden

I never said you did or implied as such
You just got a little triggered and reacted
SJW do that

I am proud you have looked beneath the surface and realised that the thread was not about you, yet you think its about you
How does that work

But keep on carrying the flag

And no, no shade casted, its the truth

I will elaborate on my opinion on this matter, if anyone cares..Lol

I look at it as the flat earth idea is an ancient belief that was derived by individuals looking for answers and did not have the proper means to explain the questions that they need answered. Through all of that came many explanations and some stuck and some did not.

I look at religion similar. It is an ancient belief for those who want to believe that there is more out there after we perish. This is fine by me. I am in no way saying that people should not believe this.

I personally went to church until I was 14. I have been baptized twice and took church and faith a little serious. The problem with it for me is when I started asking a few questions that could be only answered by the one word "faith". No logical explanation and people started to look at me funny when I started digging a little deeper into the religious aspects and history. That for me was a turning point in my quest for what I call "reasoning".

Flat earth has been proven to be a fallacy and in no way belongs in our society as a gospel. But it seems that people honestly believe in it so I can live with that.

People get so bent out of shape it really is silly. I have grown over the years to learn to respect people and their views of how they perceive the reality and the unknowns. If everyone would do this, the earth and society that reside in this world would be better off.

Thank you for reading my opinion on the matter.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

But wouldn't we need to understand Hebrew and Aramaic to get a better picture of the etymology
I did once but I think it was inconclusive

Hebrew and Aramaic are Semitic languages belonging to the Afroasiatic group of languages. Greek and Latin as well as English are Indo-European. Planet comes from Greek, and ultimately Indo-European. It's considered futile to mix apples and oranges, as in different language families like Indo-European and Proto-Semitic.

But since you ask, though I see no point in it. In biblical Hebrew, planets are called מזלות («Mazzaloth», see biblehub.com...), compare with the word involved with the Catholic consept of keping a Missal. A Missal is a sort of religious calendar, and like the Mazzaloth Missals are all about keeping track of days and times.

In other sources like the Kabbalah gem ספר יצירה (Sefer Yetzirah, see ch.IV, v.4) and in more modern Hebrew one would likely refer to planet as Heb. כוכב or כוכב לכת «Kokhav» or «Kokhav Lekhet» lit. «star» and more precise «wandering star». In biblical Greek they are called ἀστέρες πλανῆται («asteres planetai», see biblehub.com...).

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TheGreazel

My comments are way above your intelect arnt they

You and many others here are who I was mocking, you make me so proud of atheists and your beliefs
Make this thread so worthwhile and still you don't get it

You are insulting people , so nope this thread is not worth anything , you wrote this thread only to insult and intimidate.

I am a live and let live kinda guy , but when you insulting people out of the blue i get triggered.

I feel sorry for you in a way , must be hard to go through life hating other people and their way of life.

a reply to: Raggedyman
Well, he's an evolutionist, I can't tell from the link whether or not he's an atheist as well. There are also those in religion that adhere to the teaching of theistic evolution (AFAIK only Trinitarian Churches teach this within Christendom), as there are those who claim to be agnostic regarding the subject of God's existence (I think there's a good chance he belongs to this latter category, since that's the most popular one in the world, especially by those who like to sell their latest speculative philosophies about reality).

But yeah, the other thread that you're responding to was pretty ridiculous and worthless. Might as well start a new thread and point out that an evolutionist is the leader of the Flat Earth Society. There's not much more that needs to be said about it or in response to it. That argument involving ID was already lame to begin with. And it seems nobody that disagrees with the conclusion of design regarding the universe and the life in it, in that thread was willing to point that out. Too eager to jump on the bandwagon of ridiculous reasoning, thinking and arguing because the claim tickled their ears as per the pattern described at 2 Timothy 4:3,4.

a reply to: Raggedyman

How do you know he is an atheist?

originally posted by: Raggedyman
My point is simple, not amazed that it is above some peoples Comprehension

Flat earth in this instance is being championed by an atheist
Many atheists try and push the theory of a FE as a religious belief

It's not

Proof in the link

Atheists, they will believe and defend anything

But you never proved he was an atheist. There is a HUGE hole in your already shallow logic.

You can search the Pres of the FE society out, read about him, you don't have to be spoon fed by a creation site, do you?
Public record

Don't get so triggered

a reply to: Raggedyman

You wrote the thread. I couldn't care less if the man is an atheist. Him being atheist is central to your entire thread's premise and you can't be bothered to prove it. HA! I'm not going to do your research for you.

However, It's not like there is a point to the thread anyways. So what if he's an atheist? Atheists are allowed to have dumb beliefs too, AND they can be religiously fanatical about them as well. Being an atheist doesn't make you immune to bad choices. So like someone else said earlier in your thread, What is your point?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Raggedyman
What is your point?

The point obviously is that atheists are dumb as well.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Define God for me, and I'll tell you whether or not I believe in such a thing, or property, or force, or being, or whatever. I've never seen anybody provide a definition of God that isn't an inherently paradoxical. How can I believe in something no one can even define?

God: Reasoning from the Scriptures

God

Definition: The Supreme Being, whose distinctive name is Jehovah. The Hebrew language uses terms for “God” that convey the idea of strength, also of majesty, dignity, and excellence. In contrast to the true God, there are false gods. Some of these have set themselves up as gods; others have been made objects of worship by those who serve them.

Are there sound reasons for believing in God?

Ps. 19:1: “The heavens are declaring the glory of God; and of the work of his hands the expanse is telling.”

Ps. 104:24: “How many your works are, O Jehovah! All of them in wisdom you have made. The earth is full of your productions.”

Rom. 1:20: “His invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made.”

New Scientist magazine said: “The lay view persists—of scientists having ‘disproved’ religion. It is a view that commonly expects scientists to be nonbelievers; that Darwin put the last nails in God’s coffin; and that a succession of scientific and technological innovations since have ruled out the possibility of any resurrection. It is a view that is wildly wrong.”—May 26, 1977, p. 478.

A member of the French Academy of Sciences stated: “Natural order was not invented by the human mind or set up by certain perceptive powers. . . . The existence of order presupposes the existence of organizing intelligence. Such intelligence can be none other than God’s.”—Dieu existe? Oui (Paris, 1979), Christian Chabanis, quoting Pierre-Paul Grassé, p. 94.

Scientists have identified over 100 chemical elements. Their atomic structure displays an intricate mathematical interrelationship of the elements. The periodic table points to obvious design. Such amazing design could not possibly be accidental, a product of chance.

Illustration: When we see a camera, a radio, or a computer, we readily acknowledge that it must have been produced by an intelligent designer. Would it be reasonable, then, to say that far more complex things—the eye, the ear, and the human brain—did not originate with an intelligent Designer?

See also pages 84-86, under the heading “Creation.”

Does the existence of wickedness and of suffering prove that there is no God?
...
Is God a real person?
...
Did God have a beginning?
...
Is it important to use God’s name?
...
Is it important which God we serve, as long as we have some religion?
...
If Jehovah is “the only true God,” what kind of “God” is Jesus?

Jesus himself referred to his Father as “the only true God.” (John 17:3) Jehovah himself said: “Besides me there is no God.” (Isa. 44:6) The apostle Paul wrote that, to true Christians, “there is . . . one God the Father.” (1 Cor. 8:5, 6) So Jehovah is unique; no one else shares his position. Jehovah stands in utter contrast to all such objects of worship as idols, deified humans, and Satan. All these are false gods.

Jesus is spoken of in the Scriptures as “a god,” even as “Mighty God.” (John 1:1; Isa. 9:6) But nowhere is he spoken of as being Almighty, as Jehovah is. (Gen. 17:1) Jesus is said to be “the reflection of [God’s] glory,” but the Father is the Source of that glory. (Heb. 1:3) Jesus in no way seeks the position of his Father. He said: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Luke 4:8) He exists “in God’s form,” and the Father has commanded that “in the name of Jesus every knee should bend,” but this is all done “to the glory of God the Father.”—Phil. 2:5-11; see also pages 212-216.
...

More details:

God: Insight, Volume 1

Jehovah God is the most well defined character in the bible.