Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Let's first understand the terms.
An atheist is a person who denies God.
The Bible is a sacred text, canon, dogma.
On the one hand, the answer above, about ” no ” is true, no book for an atheist can be considered holy scripture or dogma.�
On the other hand, if we understand the word “Bible” more simply: “This cookbook is just a bible for the cook!”, then we are only looking for a high-quality book, with a good and complete selection of arguments that deny the existence of God (as the basis of atheism). The most complete selection, I would even say. You can also say “atheist's handbook”.�
Probably something from Dawkins, “God as an illusion”, will come to mind, for example, he is still in the trend among atheists, and wrote books on this topic.
The question is not simple. In general, people are born with a ” sense of God. ” Any god, this refers to the collective unconscious with the idea of the creator of everything hammered into it at the genetic level. And then no book will help, someone has a stronger sense of “God”, someone does not, someone was disappointed and became an atheist, Baptist or Muslim, and someone believed and became Orthodox… A case, not a book. Although the case is a conscious necessity.
Landau, Lifshitz “Course of theoretical physics” in 10 volumes.
Fichtenholz “Fundamentals of Mathematical Analysis”
Darwin “On the Origin of Species”
Pavlov's Theory of Reflexes
There is no such book. Atheists are carriers of different beliefs, and even more diverse than the sects of traditional religions. For example, Carl Sagan was an atheist, but the concept of a naturalistic god can be traced in a number of his statements. For the atheist Einstein, Spinoza's impersonal concept was acceptable. If we study the history of atheism, then in ancient times atheism not only did not deny God, but also confirmed it in its own way. Certain atheistic beliefs are also present in Buddhism. On the other hand, in modern times, for a certain part of atheists, the word “god” has no meaning or object at all, and among Russian hermetic atheists there are functional ideas that Stalin was God. The view of certain beliefs is also subjective. Due to the lack of a single definition of the word “god”, there is still no clear answer to whether a person is god in humanism, since it can be argued that secular humanists are “true” atheists? The only thing that atheists have in common is that they deny a particular god.That is, the God of Abraham or Brahma, but they cannot deny God without the given parameters, and in fact they deny the parameters of the collective god themselves, and not God as Such. None of the holy Scriptures say that a scientific experiment is necessary to believe in God, and this is usually even denied as the opposite of faith. God is known through faith, and if it were possible to comprehend Him through scientific observation, it would rather refute both the expediency of faith itself and the existence of God, and the path to Paradise would become very wide and easy. Attempts to summarize atheistic thought were made by the American scholar Richard Dawkins in his book “God as an Illusion”, but with the exception of the third chapter and some excerpts from other chapters, the book turned out to be a very weak satirical writing, filled with a number of theological errors and inconsistencies. It was sad to see how a talented scholar meddles in his own business and descends to the level of a grumpy satirist who has read the English translation of the Bible at his leisure, although I agree with the general conclusion about the unreliability of the Bible, but here it is worth noting that many texts have long been criticized both within the Abrahamic and Christians in general without the help of Dawkins ' narrow-minded conclusions, and Militant atheists are born out of personal resentment, someone's orders, ideologies of progress and a certain philosophy, and smart atheists are not interested in other people's beliefs in principle and they have no one to write books about or nothing.
Someone will call “On the Nature of Things” by Lucretius Cara. Someone atheistic works of Holbach. I will put the Tripitaka, the sacred scripture of Buddhism, first. This is religion: religion without God, personalism without man, and salvation… into nothing!