Atheists are Polytheists!

by

Dr. Jaafar Sheikh Idris


An atheist is said to be someone who denies the existence of the Creator. This is a good definition, provided that we mean by it that the creator whose existence they deny is the only God of religion, the one true Creator. Otherwise, atheists do believe in creators, albeit they do not recognize them under that appellation. This is so because atheists, in their endeavor to find alternatives to God for explaining the existence of the temporal things we see around us, invent some imaginary entities and give them some of the essential attributes of God.

Thus materialistic atheists used to believe in matter as such a god. But this matter-god of theirs is not the matter with which we are familiar in our daily life; it is something that is eternal and everlasting, hence the statement, which used to masquerade as a scientific fact, "matter is neither created nor destroyed." But when you ask them to point this eternal and everlasting matter you discover that they are only chasing a will-o'-the-wisp. The matter that we can recognize and to which we can point is matter in the form of the large heavenly bodies, in the form of earthly physical things, and in the form of the constituents of these things: molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, photons, etc., none of which is eternal. Atheistic materialists used to believe in an eternal matter behind all such material things which come and go, but the advent of the "big bang" theory shattered all hopes in the existence of such matter. Scientists now believe that everything - matter, energy, even space and time - had a beginning. In fact they speak about a moment of creation of all these things.

Another such imaginary god is Nature (with a capital N). The nature with which we are familiar is the totality of natural things. But when we are told that Nature does this or that, as atheists are prone to say, we find ourselves at a loss. What is this Nature? If it be the one we know, how can it cause or create itself? But if it is something else, then we want to have proof of its existence.

The same applies to Evolution. Now evolution, scientifically speaking, is "[t]he gradual process by which the present diversity of plant and animal life arose from the earliest and most primary organisms." (Concise Science Dictionary) But the Evolution of the atheists is not this process; rather it is the agent which brings about the process. Only in this unscientific and imaginary sense can evolution take the place of God; otherwise, a believer who accepts the theory of evolution can easily reconcile it with his belief in God, by saying that that process is itself the work of the Creator.

There are, on the other hand, atheists who say in a misleading way that they believe in God; but on inspection, their god turns out to be the god of the atheists. I am referring here to people like Einstein, who is said by some to have been a believer, but whose god was in fact not God the Creator in whom we all believe. Einstein declared that he believed in "Spinoza's god," i.e. in a god that is identical with the universe, and who does not thus interfere from outside in its working. "The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation, "says Einstein, "cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events." [Quoted by Hans Kung, Does God Exist? Vantage Books, 1981, p. 629]

Thus all atheists are in fact polytheists, or mushriks. A mushrik, according to Islam, is one who believes in a god or gods besides, or to the exclusion of, the one true God, or who worships such gods, even if he also worships the true God. That perhaps is the reason why the Qur'an never talks about atheists, but only about mushriks (or polytheists).

Source

So, tintingz is a polytheists.

What a pool of nonsense from a dr.

Rashduct4luv:
Atheists are Polytheists!

by

Dr. Jaafar Sheikh Idris


An atheist is said to be someone who denies the existence of the Creator. This is a good definition, provided that we mean by it that the creator whose existence they deny is the only God of religion, the one true Creator. Otherwise, atheists do believe in creators, albeit they do not recognize them under that appellation. This is so because atheists, in their endeavor to find alternatives to God for explaining the existence of the temporal things we see around us, invent some imaginary entities and give them some of the essential attributes of God.

Atheists lack belief in God/s, the God religions call the creator of all, the God they worship.

These God/s doesn't have evidences for their existence which makes Atheists lack the belief in their existence.

But when it comes to the possibility of a first cause, most Atheists are open to it but then this first cause is unknown therefore they lack the belief in it(agnostic Atheism).

Atheists don't believe in creator God/s whether in religion concept or not, if they believe in a creator God why are they still Atheist? Such person should divert to Deism.

Thus materialistic atheists used to believe in matter as such a god.

Atheists don't believe matter is God.

The people that believe in this concept are pantheists.

But this matter-god of theirs is not the matter with which we are familiar in our daily life; it is something that is eternal and everlasting, hence the statement, which used to masquerade as a scientific fact, "matter is neither created nor destroyed." But when you ask them to point this eternal and everlasting matter you discover that they are only chasing a will-o'-the-wisp. The matter that we can recognize and to which we can point is matter in the form of the large heavenly bodies, in the form of earthly physical things, and in the form of the constituents of these things: molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, photons, etc., none of which is eternal. Atheistic materialists used to believe in an eternal matter behind all such material things which come and go, but the advent of the "big bang" theory shattered all hopes in the existence of such matter.

Matter is the physical things in the universe, while the universe is run by energy which can neither be created nor destroyed.

Is matter eternal, well I don't know what I know is there's no antimatter generally available in the universe to destroy matter.

So the only way to really "destroy" or "convert" ordinary matter is to pair it with the same amount of antimatter so that their "matterness" cancels out—but in practice there is almost no antimatter generally available in the universe. Source

I think this Dr should read more about physics instead of the ignorance he is arrogantly displaying.

Scientists now believe that everything - matter, energy, even space and time - had a beginning. In fact they speak about a moment of creation of all these things.

Lol, another Ignorance. Why didn't he mention where scientists mention the creation and beginning of energy, space-time and matter?

Before the big bang there was gravitational singularity or initial singularity where the universe is infinite, the singularity contained all the mass and space-time.

If energy, space-time had a beginning does this means there was nothing initially? If this is the case, can something come from nothing? And if they were created who created them and is there energy and space-time where the creator is?

Another such imaginary god is Nature (with a capital N). The nature with which we are familiar is the totality of natural things. But when we are told that Nature does this or that, as atheists are prone to say, we find ourselves at a loss. What is this Nature? If it be the one we know, how can it cause or create itself? But if it is something else, then we want to have proof of its existence.

Nature is not imaginary, nature is reality, everything around you are nature, you're nature, the universe run in natural process.

Pantheists believe nature is divine and Gods, atheists don't believe that!

Is nature created, we don't know, what we know is nature is nature and no evidence point it cause to God.

The same applies to Evolution. Now evolution, scientifically speaking, is "[t]he gradual process by which the present diversity of plant and animal life arose from the earliest and most primary organisms." (Concise Science Dictionary) But the Evolution of the atheists is not this process; rather it is the agent which brings about the process. Only in this unscientific and imaginary sense can evolution take the place of God; otherwise, a believer who accepts the theory of evolution can easily reconcile it with his belief in God, by saying that that process is itself the work of the Creator.

There is no evolution of atheists!, where is this man getting this nonsense from? Evolution of atheists seriously??

Atheists don't believe there's an agent behind evolution, evolution is natural selection, mutation etc It seems this man is delusional with his articles.

Ofcos you can fantasize your God to be behind evolution, just know that such God is imperfect.

There are, on the other hand, atheists who say in a misleading way that they believe in God; but on inspection, their god turns out to be the god of the atheists. I am referring here to people like Einstein, who is said by some to have been a believer, but whose god was in fact not God the Creator in whom we all believe. Einstein declared that he believed in "Spinoza's god," i.e. in a god that is identical with the universe, and who does not thus interfere from outside in its working. "The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation, "says Einstein, "cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events." [Quoted by Hans Kung, Does God Exist? Vantage Books, 1981, p. 629]

Einstein is not an atheist but a pantheist.

Here,

Einstein stated that he believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza.

"I am not an atheist", preferring to call himself an agnostic, or a "religious nonbeliever." Source

Don't use Einstein as an example of an atheist that believe in God/s because he's not an atheist, any atheists that believe in God/s is no longer an atheists because that's the opposite of what Atheism means.

Thus all atheists are in fact polytheists, or mushriks. A mushrik, according to Islam, is one who believes in a god or gods besides, or to the exclusion of, the one true God, or who worships such gods, even if he also worships the true God. That perhaps is the reason why the Qur'an never talks about atheists, but only about mushriks (or polytheists).

Source

Maybe you and your Dr should educate yourself on what Atheism is, what Pantheism is and read about quantum physics.

The author is obviously confusing Atheism with Pantheism and he's arrogantly displaying his Ignorance thinking he's making a point.

aadoiza:
So, tintingz is a polytheists.

No I'm not.

I'm not a pantheists which the OP is confusing atheism with.

tintingz:
No I'm not.

I'm not a pantheists which the OP is confusing atheism with.

But you sometimes pray to FSM and leprechaun

aadoiza:

But you sometimes pray to FSM and leprechaun

They are satire.

tintingz:
No I'm not.

I'm not a pantheists which the OP is confusing atheism with.

Stop being confused.

"Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, has described Pantheism as “sexed-up atheism."

You are a polytheist boda Taiwo and of course a bigger polytheist than "abogibope" (i.e. item worshipers).

I know say your argument na ad infinitum...cos you get time wella for spacious argument!

Abeg no reply this.

Rashduct4luv:


Stop being confused.

"Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, has described Pantheism as “sexed-up atheism."

Who's confused? Me or the person that is mixing two positions up?

So pantheism being sexed-up atheism means atheism? Does Islam being sexed-up Christianity and Judaism means Islam is both?

Pantheism believe in impersonal God, they believe the universe, nature are divine and Gods.

Atheism is the opposite of the claim in belief in God/s existence. Atheists don't believe in God/s nor regard anything as God.

So who's confused me or you?

You are a polytheist boda Taiwo and of course a bigger polytheist than "abogibope" (i.e. item worshipers).

You keep grasping at straws.

Maybe you should define polytheism and atheism.

I know say your argument na ad infinitum...cos you get time wella for spacious argument!

Abeg no reply this.

I've time to define my position (Atheism), you can't open a thread and be posting nonsense and expect no criticism.

You discover your thread is flawed, an epic fail reason you're finding an escape route, if you know your OP arguments is valid why not defend what you post?

It doesn't make sense.

Omo see as tintingz dey vex. Shege!!