It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Communism was a comprehensive, all-embracing religion and not simply a political party, political system or philosophy. This fact is illustrated by the numerous ways in which Communism embraced and attempted to promulgate peculiar quasi-religious (and often clearly anti-scientific) beliefs which had nothing all to do with politics or government. Although Communism typically touted itself as anti-religious and pro-science, it was, in fact, deeply anti-scientific and clearly a religion. One of Communism's hallmarks in the Soviet Union and China was its aggressive and violent suppression of other religions. Communism was "anti-religious" only in the sense that it forcibly suppressed all religions other than itself. From: Colin MacCabe, Godard: A Portrait of the Artist at Seventy, Farrar, Straus and Giroux: New York (2003), page 398:
It is this dual allegiance to the philosophy of science and the Communist Party which explains Althusser's lack of publications in the fifties. In the late forties a Soviet, Lyssenko, challenged Darwinism by arguing for the inheritance of acquired characteristics. Stalin backed the fraudulent scientist and argued for a distinction between proletarian and bourgeois science so that science itself became a function of the class struggle. Communist philosophers and scientists were pressured to back both Lyssenko and the philosophical distinction in a campaign whcih effectively severed any serious links between scientists and the Communist movement.
In the Cairo museum and in other museums around the world there are examples of stone ware that were found in and around the step pyramid at Saqqarra. Petrie also found pieces of similar stoneware at Giza. There are several special things about these bowls, vases and plates.
These bowls and stone dishes/platters are some of the finest ever found, and they are from the earliest period of ancient Egyptian civilization. They are made from a variety of materials - from soft, such as alabaster, all the way up the hardness scale to very hard, such as granite.
Stoneware such as this has not been found from any later era in Egyptian history - it seems that the skills necessary were lost.
Some delicate vases are made of very brittle stone such as schist (like a flint) and yet are finished, turned and polished, to a flawless paper thin edge - an extraordinary feat of craftsmanship.
At least one piece is so flawlessly turned that the entire bowl (about 9" in diameter, fully hollowed out including an undercut of the 3in opening in the top) balances perfectly (the top rests horizontally when the bowl is placed on a glass shelf) on a round tipped bottom no bigger than the size and shape of the tip of a hen's egg !
This requires that the entire bowl have a symmetrical wall thickness without any substantial error! (With a base area so tiny - less than .15 " sq - any asymmetry in a material as dense as granite would produce a lean in the balance of the finished piece.) This kind of skill will raise the eyebrows of any machinist. To produce such a piece in clay would be very impressive. In granite it is incredible.
Other pieces turned out of granite, porphory or basalt are fully hollowed with narrow undercut flared openings, and some even have long necks. Since we have yet to reproduce such pieces it is safe to say that the techniques or machinery they employed to produce these bowls has yet to be replicated.
Notice something interesting about the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings? Atheists are nowhere to be found. Every time there is a public gathering there is talk of God and divine mercy and spiritual healing. Even secular people like the poet Nikki Giovanni use language that is heavily drenched with religious symbolism and meaning.
The atheist writer Richard Dawkins has observed that according to the findings of modern science, the universe has all the properties of a system that is utterly devoid of meaning. The main characteristic of the universe is pitiless indifference. Dawkins further argues that we human beings are simply agglomerations of molecules, assembled into functional units over millennia of natural selection, and as for the soul--well, that's an illusion!
To no one's surprise, Dawkins has not been invited to speak to the grieving Virginia Tech community. What this tells me is that if it's difficult to know where God is when bad things happen, it is even more difficult for atheism to deal with the problem of evil. The reason is that in a purely materialist universe, immaterial things like good and evil and souls simply do not exist. For scientific atheists like Dawkins, Cho's shooting of all those people can be understood in this way--molecules acting upon molecules.
If this is the best that modern science has to offer us, I think we need something more than modern science.
Originally posted by undo
now they were functioning with science that believed everything was mundane. man was the pinnacle of everything (a catholic teaching which was demonstrated in the belief that Christ and the Holy Spirit took a back seat to pope and priests). so today, you still have huge groups of catholics, atheists , protestants and even pagans, who think the universe is still a very mundane and mechanical place.
Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.
While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution.
I dunno about other Atheists, but I don't find the universe to be mundane at all. Mechanical yes, I'm glad it's mechanical, that means it's reliable,consistent, and possible to understand. I find the universe to be exciting and fantastic, just think of all the other worlds and sights to see, and things yet to be discovered. I'm also happy believing that this little speck of sand and its little ants called humans isn't playing the starring role. How egotistical to think we are the central characters in all the vast cosmos. go out in the woods, lift up a rock, and imagine all the little germs and microorganisms busy reproducing themselves. That's us.
. so today, you still have huge gruops of catholics, atheists , protestants and even pagans, who think the universe is still a very mundane and mechanical place.
[edit on 27-3-2008 by undo]
Originally posted by Gigatronix
You don't really think Atheists are winning this battle do you? How can Atheist hope to execute any kind of conspiracy when they are so overwhelmingly outnumbered and the powerful people in the world generally subscribe to some kind of religion?
[edit on 27-3-2008 by Gigatronix]
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
Kind of like todays Catholic position on evolution. It is a marriage of science and spiritual. They allow for evolution of the physical body but they hold on to the concept of the soul. Another compromise position.
Originally posted by Gigatronix
I dunno about other Atheists, but I don't find the universe to be mundane at all. Mechanical yes, I'm glad it's mechanical, that means it's reliable,consistent, and possible to understand. I find the universe to be exciting and fantastic, just think of all the other worlds and sights to see, and things yet to be discovered. I'm also happy believing that this little speck of sand and its little ants called humans isn't playing the starring role. How egotistical to think we are the central characters in all the vast cosmos. go out in the woods, lift up a rock, and imagine all the little germs and microorganisms busy reproducing themselves. That's us.
This is my belief based on the idea that "religion" refers to the things we simply don't understand yet, not the things which are "supernatural"
Originally posted by Gigatronix
I dunno about other Atheists, but I don't find the universe to be mundane at all. Mechanical yes, I'm glad it's mechanical, that means it's reliable,consistent, and possible to understand. I find the universe to be exciting and fantastic, just think of all the other worlds and sights to see, and things yet to be discovered. I'm also happy believing that this little speck of sand and its little ants called humans isn't playing the starring role. How egotistical to think we are the central characters in all the vast cosmos. go out in the woods, lift up a rock, and imagine all the little germs and microorganisms busy reproducing themselves. That's us.
Originally posted by Gigatronix
I dunno about other Atheists, but I don't find the universe to be mundane at all. Mechanical yes, I'm glad it's mechanical, that means it's reliable,consistent, and possible to understand. I find the universe to be exciting and fantastic, just think of all the other worlds and sights to see, and things yet to be discovered. I'm also happy believing that this little speck of sand and its little ants called humans isn't playing the starring role. How egotistical to think we are the central characters in all the vast cosmos. go out in the woods, lift up a rock, and imagine all the little germs and microorganisms busy reproducing themselves. That's us.
. so today, you still have huge gruops of catholics, atheists , protestants and even pagans, who think the universe is still a very mundane and mechanical place.
[edit on 27-3-2008 by undo]
[edit on 27-3-2008 by Gigatronix]
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I doubt the human race will live long enough to become enlightened to the point science and religion peacefully coexist, although it is a nice sentiment.