Atheists....

[Adelheid]

Now, I'm NOT an atheist, but I've always wondered what exactly an atheist thinks or believes (now there's a contradiction if you've ever seen one! :lol: athesist and believe might as well see if you have a believer who disbelieves. :lol: )

Now what exactly does an atheist believe?? What is the definition you would give to describe an atheist?

I don't know if this is going to a popular thread or not, but I'll give it a try... ;)

[Jay]

Atheist at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist)
"Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively believing in the non-existence of deities."

Couldn't have put it better.

[Adelheid]

contradictions.... haha... somehow atheists and believing don't go together, just as believers and unbelieving don't go together..... ;)

[Jay]

The point is an atheist doesn't belive IN deities. The way you put it sounds like 'to belive' has only a single meaning, that is 'having a theistic belief'.

[dejosc]

my personal view of being an atheist is that i just dont believe in any gods and follow no religion. I personally dislike religions as they are power hungry but i cant believe in gods because there is no proof also in the case of 'god' in christianity(which is the belief i know best because it was forced upon me as a younger child) it has been proven wrong many times as they say the bible is the word of god so if he disliked yi hed get soeone to change it surely. also an all-powerful being that created a planet i dont believe if it is as wise as it says it is would it let millions die? as a punishment or to learn from mistake as death is not learning.

[sir]

contradictions.... haha... somehow atheists and believing don't go together, just as believers and unbelieving don't go together..... ;)
I know an atheist who believes in charity...how about that?

the problem with the dogmatic believers is that they never think that their dogma/doctrine might be questionable ... one doesn't need a very high iq to understand that the hundreds of christian dogmas have tremendous gaps because they are MADE BY PEOPLE with more or less genius,with slight or serious psychological problems and with heaps of religious fanaticism.

if u believe in something,whatever that is,fine,good for you...but just don't try to prove me that i'm wrong if i don't trust any kind of dogma and i question everithing,starting with your idols: belief in god and love.
...trying to prove god with arguments is the worst trap a believer can fall into.
the reigious genius of the jews has given the only accurate definition for god ever... god said: "i am who i am"... beyond description,intimate,subjectiv...therefore if u've found him dont lose him by trying to prove him with arguments (wich r always vulgar in this matter).

[Koa]

When I stopped going to the church my mum sometimes called me 'atheist' trying to offend me... as a matter of fact, she was just calling me by the right cathegory I suppose...
Actually, I've always seen atheists refered to as people who believe that there is NO god, while 'agnostic' (assuming it's an English word...) are those who just don't believe in god but are not negating his existence.

So to me an atheist is someone who is convinced that god doesn't exist. That's why for a long time I prefered to call myself 'agnostic', but it is also partly due to the sense of guilt I've felt for a while and still slightly feel for not believing, as my family raised me as a catholic and they are still religious. But I can't really pretend to have feelings I don't have, and at the present moment I feel really close to atheism, cos I'm not really able to believe in a god or more. I do happen to believe in other things, but not always... I'm a quite beliefless person I guess.

So I guess an ateist can believe in something else... cos the word atheist includes the 'theo' part which in Greek meant god or religion or something like that (think of 'theology'), while the a- in front of the word always negates the rest.

[Corlen]

Atheists don't believe in a god. Like myself I only believe in materials processions. Of which I can personally see, touch, and feel. Unlike a god as many Christians believe in I do not see him. I have tried to pray to see some type of signs that to prove he exists, but as of now I have failed to get a reply. Therefore I don't believe there is a god, or ever will be one.

[Dyrwen]

Atheists only have to have a lack of belief in gods. That is all being an atheist entails. Any "dogma" associated, any religion added on, any "beliefs" an atheist holds are individually associated only with the person.

That's my general definition and one that is most accurate via studying the root of the word, as well.

[Ancestor]

Atheists don't believe in a god. Like myself I only believe in materials processions. Of which I can personally see, touch, and feel. Unlike a god as many Christians believe in I do not see him. I have tried to pray to see some type of signs that to prove he exists, but as of now I have failed to get a reply. Therefore I don't believe there is a god, or ever will be one.

I am a person who does have faith and I am not here to convert anyone but to learn more about people. Learning is an enriching experience and one I enjoy experiencing. How do you Corlen know you have not gotten a answer to your prayers? I do not wish to offend but am just curious because not all answers are heard nor are they the ones we wish to hear. I am not just talking from a higher but from people we know. I believe if you are happy as a person with or without faith then that is fine because happiness is important. Also believe that faith should never be pushed onto someone and it should be your own choice to choose your paths in life.

[sir]

just saw this movie,"the island"...there's a nice definition of god there:

"question: what's god?
answer: u know,when u want something really bad and u close your eyes and u wish for it? that's the guy that ignores u... "
amen!:angel:

[Loki]

"question: what's god?
answer: u know,when u want something really bad and u close your eyes and u wish for it? that's the guy that ignores u... "
amen!

Nice. :D

My definition is:

A giant, bearded, invisible sort of man who lives above the clouds watching the events of the world below in a bemused sort of way and doing nothing about them.

[Ancestor]

just saw this movie,"the island"...there's a nice definition of god there:

"question: what's god?
answer: u know,when u want something really bad and u close your eyes and u wish for it? that's the guy that ignores u... "
amen!:angel:

I do not feel you are ignored but that you expect a certain answer and that it is not the answer you will always receive. I should be hating Great Spirit (God) for allowing the horrific things that happened to me but I do not. Your quote to me sounds selfish and no offense. I close my eye and pray for everyone to receive healing. Anything else I want I have to work for because it is not right for someone else to hand it to me that is not earning it. I do not pray for myself often and that feels right to me as I am sure you being a atheist feels right to you. I am trying to say that your quote is how people with faith do not wish for it. They often do not ask for anything for themselves even at least the people I know.

[Ancestor]

I do hope that I have not implied that you should start believing the same way as I do. No one should be forced to have the same beliefs as mine and even though mine are in the new age category does not mean I do not have faith. My faith is my own and to each their own and I do hope that my words were not implying conversion or offensive. If so I do apologize I just wanted to state an opinion.

[Adelheid]

What do atheist believe in after death? Since they don't think there's a God, they obviously would have no cause to believe in heaven or Hell, since those 2 are closely linked to what God says happens after death. Is there an eternity for them?

I don't think they would believe in nothingness after death, right? That's preposterous! But then, for those who believe in evolution, that must be their conclusion, isn't it?

[Satirical]

To deny is to accept as a basis for denial. To be an athiest is to say that there is something to be denied. Just as the slave only knows that he is a slave in the presence of the master. I see the word dogma put out here.

[subterranean]

I'm just curious, how come someone who does not believe in the existance of something have a personal definition of that thing??



Nice. :D

My definition is:

A giant, bearded, invisible sort of man who lives above the clouds watching the events of the world below in a bemused sort of way and doing nothing about them.

[Ancestor]

What do atheist believe in after death? Since they don't think there's a God, they obviously would have no cause to believe in heaven or Hell, since those 2 are closely linked to what God says happens after death. Is there an eternity for them?

I don't think they would believe in nothingness after death, right? That's preposterous! But then, for those who believe in evolution, that must be their conclusion, isn't it?

Just because someone does not believe in a God or higher being does not necessarily mean that they do not believe in a after life. I am a person of faith but I do not believe in heaven or hell. For me most religions dwell way too much upon the negative aspects of life and that for me is a poisonous to my body. Through my faith (spiritualism) I dwell on the positive flow of life and I send out positive healing to those whom need it. Not all spiritualist believe the same as I do and some believe in the Bible as strong as you seem to do. For me I do not fully believe in the Bible only small parts of it. But that is my choice and that is has is should be. When I cross over and find my beliefs were then so be it. But I cannot see how they can be wrong for me because they fill my heart with joy. We were not all created to be exactly the same as everyone else and I am grateful for that. If a person can truly be happy living with or without faith what is wrong with that. Perhaps a atheist is correct and I am wrong either way I am not grateful for my life when there was a time I was not. My faith helped me but in the end I did the work to become a happier person.

[Loki]

I'm just curious, how come someone who does not believe in the existance of something have a personal definition of that thing??

If you don't believe there is such a thing as witches, does that necessarilly mean that you can't have your own personal idea of what witches could be like? (Think Harry Potter :D)

[subterranean]

If I don't believe in witches or dark power or black magic, I wouldn't have my own personal definitions. The definitions I have would probably only the general ones, as (i.e.) stated in dictionary.

[Loki]

But would there be any limit on using your own imagination creatively in such cases? As much as I respect the dictionary, definitions can be very drab sometimes. For example:


A woman claiming or popularly believed to possess magical powers and practice sorcery.

What sort of sorcery? What kind of magical powers? This is where imagination comes in. You can improvise even within a definition.

God, on the other hand:


A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.

Doesn't my definition fit beneath that? Sure, my god doesn't really do much ruling (sometimes he grants a prayer though), he usually just stares down at the world from his divine couch of clouds...

This is the atheist thread, right? We can be atheists here, I gather. ;)

[Adelheid]

Yep...be as atheistic as much as you ever wanted to be in your life! :D

[Loki]

Yep...be as atheistic as much as you ever wanted to be in your life!

Thank you!!! :D That's the nicest...thing...a Christian has every said to me as regards atheism. :) :nod:

[sir]

As we see in Kantian metaphysics, a coherent theory of transcendent objects is just impossible.

Believing in God is a sweet surrender to the "mysteries" of some invisible world we wish there was , therefore an abandon of the reason. Some of us just can’t afford it, to walk on the very quick sands the mysterious invisible world has prepared for us, especially when we refuse to completely abandon the reason and the common sense. As far as I’m concerned I am quite overwhelmed by the mysteries I find in the visible world.

Thing is,if one believes in god this is one's own problem,ilusion,weltanschauung...but by trying to prove his existence,one steps into the realm of sophisms which is quite unhealthy for a reasonable person.

[Satirical]

Kantian metaphysics huh, impossible huh, read some Sartre, or Hegel even.

[sir]

Kantian metaphysics huh, impossible huh, read some Sartre, or Hegel even.
a famous american president (big fan of crackers) was once about to die because he never listened to his mother's advice:"first chew,then swallow" ... whether he got it other way round or he took it way too metaphorical...dunno...
i once dated a girl who told me that Sartre was not good for the skin...i dumped her...never trust women who speak their mind at the first date!

now,actually,i never "read some Sartre,or Hegel even"...but i have a friend who has a friend who once asked:

who on earth would put together a) Hegel with his organic and teleological view of human society ,in direct opposition to the conceptions of individual rights and existentialism , with b) the atheist existentialist Sartre who stated (the opposit of any theological and teleological dialecticism) that we are here willy-nilly and must manage to do the best we can with endemic nothingness installed upon eternal floorlessness?
(this friend of my friend also said that sartre's ideas could be quite readable if disregarded his marxist,comunist,totally leftish political views...brrrrrr!)
---------------------------------

ps: Schopenhauer about Hegel :"The height of audacity in serving up pure nonsense, in stringing together senseless and extravagant mazes of words, such as had been only previously known in madhouses, was finally reached in Hegel, and became the instrument of the most barefaced, general mystification that has ever taken place, with a result which will appear fabulous to posterity, as a monument to German stupidity."

...first chewing...mi raccomando!!!! :wave:

[Satirical]

Wow, a bit sensitive aren't we? I did not intend to pair them myself, only in light of your bases of "Kantian metaphysics" would I even bring them up. So I restate...impossible huh, read some Berkeley, or Borges even lol.

P.S. I love Schopenhauer, but his enviroment had something to do with that anger(I say this instead of argument because this was not one) he held, Things like that sort of taint the conviction wouldn't you say?

This, of course, is for your friend of a friend.

[subterranean]

Sorry to say, I don't really see a consistency ..

Like I said, I was just curios..




But would there be any limit on using your own imagination creatively in such cases? As much as I respect the dictionary, definitions can be very drab sometimes. For example:



What sort of sorcery? What kind of magical powers? This is where imagination comes in. You can improvise even within a definition.

God, on the other hand:



Doesn't my definition fit beneath that? Sure, my god doesn't really do much ruling (sometimes he grants a prayer though), he usually just stares down at the world from his divine couch of clouds...

This is the atheist thread, right? We can be atheists here, I gather. ;)




i once dated a girl who told me that Sartre was not good for the skin...i dumped her...never trust women who speak their mind at the first date!


Ah I see . . . interesting. I seem have no problem with that :)

[Ancestor]

Thing is,if one believes in god this is one's own problem,ilusion,weltanschauung...but by trying to prove his existence,one steps into the realm of sophisms which is quite unhealthy for a reasonable person.

I happen to be a reasonable person who was much unhealthier without my faith then I am today. I totally disagree with you sir and no offense but some people need to find faith to in order to be a healthier person and some do not. That is what makes us all very unique as you know and thank goodness we are all unique.

[Adelheid]

I totally disagree with you sir and no offense but some people need to find faith to in order to be a healthier person and some do not. That is what makes us all very unique as you know and thank goodness we are all unique.

Well, I guess we are all unique, but it doesn't necessarily take people of different faith to make us unique. Each of us were made different in characteristics, look, etc. None of us are alike.


If a person can truly be happy living with or without faith what is wrong with that.

We may be happy here. But the amount of time on earth compared to eternity is the tiniest fraction one can imagine. Would you rather be happy for this tinest fraction of time than for eternity? Eternity never ends, while life on earth does. :nod:

[Koa]

Well I don't believe in eternity for example... everything has an end.


some people need to find faith to in order to be a healthier person and some do not

Now doesn't this make sense? Some people need to believe in something, some don't, or rather they need to believe in different things... There was a time when I believed in Literature and that sort of saved my life but now I'm not even really sure about that so nevermind, but everyone has his/her own path to follow...

[sir]

So I restate...impossible huh, read some Berkeley, or Borges even lol. berkeley and his disciple... ha,ha,ha ...u gotta b kiddin me,dude! :lol: lol indeed,even lmao!!!

Ancestor and Adelheid , i really apreciate your missionary task on this thread even though i'd rather need something like: "halleluia!!!! touch the screen! touch the screen!..."....that might cure my stupid atheism or agnosticism or whatever my anguish is...
-----------------------

George Bernard Shaw :

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."

"No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says; he is always convinced that it says what he means."

[sir]

THE OFFICIAL GOD FAQ...(now, that's what i call an exhaustive even though succint site): http://www.400monkeys.com/God/

[Satirical]

Thought you would like that

[sir]

Thought you would like thatlike what?
your new signature? yeah,cool... see,even skeptic and atheist people are addicted to life... it is hope, curiosity and in fortunate cases LOVE (the fulfil of the the previous two ,which christianity has unfairly monopolised),who keeps a man alive,not a philosophical sistem,religious dogma or any other theory...

russell said also: "The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge"

[Ancestor]

berkeley and his disciple... ha,ha,ha ...u gotta b kiddin me,dude! :lol: lol indeed,even lmao!!!

Ancestor and Adelheid , i really apreciate your missionary task on this thread even though i'd rather need something like: "halleluia!!!! touch the screen! touch the screen!..."....that might cure my stupid atheism or agnosticism or whatever my anguish is...

I do not think nor feel that atheism or agnosticism is stupid nor do I wish that you would suddenly start believing in God. You should never be forced to convert and give up your belief that there is no God. You do appear arrogant at times and that was not meant to offend in fact I do not mind a little arrogance. In my heart I know there is a higher being and just wish you would not try to convince me to change my beliefs. If I missed interpreted you do forgive me.

[sir]

In my heart I know there is a higher being and just wish you would not try to convince me to change my beliefs.

:confused: :brickwall : :crash:

...so u think is ME who is trying 2 convince YOU 2 change your beliefs??? ... well,would u b so kind to point out one of my phrases that is specifically ment 2 change your beliefs? ...I feel some kind of fear and insecurity in your phrase above...watch out,some people just need to believe,don't lose that! ;)


You do appear arrogant at times and that was not meant to offend in fact I do not mind a little arrogance.. indeed u didn't offend me...somehow,from u,it sounds more like a compliment...thanx,darling!

"Women have a wonderful instinct about things. They can discover everything except the obvious." - oscar wilde

[subterranean]

Now doesn't this make sense? Some people need to believe in something, some don't, or rather they need to believe in different things... There was a time when I believed in Literature and that sort of saved my life but now I'm not even really sure about that so nevermind, but everyone has his/her own path to follow...

Indeed Koa, some people considered books as their escape..means to keep their mind healty...; some (whom I coincedently know) volunteered in social works on weekend, where from Monday to Friday, they act like a true "capitalists", making profit as huge as they can. These charity acts, for them, are ways to maintain their "humanity sides.

This believe thing will always be a subjective matter.

[Satirical]

I meant Berkeley and Borges. The signature had nothing to do with this lol. Still, how kind of you to notice.

[Ancestor]

...so u think is ME who is trying 2 convince YOU 2 change your beliefs??? ... well,would u b so kind to point out one of my phrases that is specifically ment 2 change your beliefs? ...I feel some kind of fear and insecurity in your phrase above...watch out,some people just need to believe,don't lose that! ;)
Thing is,if one believes in god this is one's own problem,ilusion,weltanschauung...but by trying to prove his existence,one steps into the realm of sophisms which is quite unhealthy for a reasonable person.

Since you implied believing in god is one's own problem it gave me the impression you want everyone to not believe in a higher being. I do not consider it to be a problem. However I am curious to what the word weltanschauung means. I never heard of the word. You may mock me all you want in the end I decide on how your words affect me. There was a time I did not believe in a higher being and one point questioned how could a higher being let me go through a horrific ordeal. Answer: He did not man's free will did and in order to stop horrible things from happening would not have made me whom I am today. You may say all you like because you are young yet and have much to learn as do I about the world around us. Just because the human eye did not see it does not mean it was not ever there. I do not know about you but what is over looked by others I strive to see beyond the small limitations of closed minds.

[Satirical]

Etymology: German, from Welt world + Anschauung view
: a comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world especially from a specific standpoint

[Ancestor]

Etymology: German, from Welt world + Anschauung view
: a comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world especially from a specific standpoint

Thanks for defining it for me I do appreciate that. :)

[Ancestor]

quoted by sir"Women have a wonderful instinct about things. They can discover everything except the obvious." - oscar wilde

My instincts are so good that I knew before a doctor did that my sister was going to end up a amputee. That means I look beyond the obvious because that is where most people fear to look. I do not mean to sound arrogant here but knowing something about someone you love makes you a freak of nature no one can relate to. I knew without a doubt she would lose it and there are things I still know without a doubt without seeing them until they come true. You tell me sir how is it possible for me know something before seeing, hearing, or experiencing it? I surly cannot and it happens to me and I am sane.

[sir]

You may say all you like because you are young yet and have much to learn as do I about the world around us.


You tell me sir how is it possible for me know something before seeing, hearing, or experiencing it? I surly cannot and it happens to me and I am sane.
.
yup,u r right...i'm 2 young and i have so much 2 learn about...stuff...but believe me,i'm also 2 old 2 go round in circles with someone who "knows something before seeing, hearing, or experiencing it"...

Satirical,how can i like berkeley and any idealist if i like thinkers such as russell?

[Satirical]

Do you have a sense of humor? You seem well read, did you pay attention?

[sir]

Do you have a sense of humor? You seem well read, did you pay attention? ...u r so exquisitely witty :goof: ... your humor is so subtle ...i better step back...

[Koa]

Now I shouldn't step into someone else's discussion (but since when I do things I should do) but I really see no point in arguing cos noone is really trying to convince anyone, but of course noone will understand the other's point completely. I also sort of feel uncomfortable about believers always going on about how good it is to believe and implying between lines (and I think that they don't always realise it) that we are missing something, but that's also part of my present feeling of total refuse of anything that has to do with any kind of religious believe... So I probably also sound 'arrogant' at times cos we unbelievers also have that kind of way... But that doesnt mean that we are trying to convince each other cos we all (should) know that it's impossible, even if there are people who still try (that is, my grandmother...).

[Satirical]

As are you, we step back together.

[Satirical]

I heard it was the soma
Then heard it was the soul
St. Paul was driving lonely home
But forgot to pay the toll

Greekarious son Plotinus
Help him lay down the funds
It emminated from his pocket
Or from Spinoza's ONE

Matters not says Augustine
The Roman's made of better things
Forget the tale the lot of ya
While we take out Apocrapha

[Lilac_R]

hello everyone,
this is my 1st visit here to the forum, it was coz of that topic(& what a topic!!!). I'm a Muslim girl (but not a terrorist ;) ) & i got a dear friend who is atheist. i got no problem with that except for a few points..
i once asked him ,don't u ever ever feel u might b on the wrong side?!! what if it turned out that ur "theory" about the world was wrong? u'd b the only one who pays 4 it..& that hurts, big time!
secondly, that friend is one of the most depressive nihilistic persons i've ever known in my whole life..is everyone,atheist one, feels the same? if so, then there must b sth wrong, definitely..
well, i didn't mean t b intruding or not friendly at all, these were just my ideas n "wonders" about the topic, so wut d u think?

[Koa]

i once asked him ,don't u ever ever feel u might b on the wrong side?!! what if it turned out that ur "theory" about the world was wrong? u'd b the only one who pays 4 it..& that hurts, big time!


Excuse me but... and do you ever wonder if it is your side that's wrong? I'm not meaning to provoke but this question came to me so naturally while reading yours... I'd really quote the Bible now (well I still got a religious education before I had my freedom to choose...which culturally I dont regret) when it says that people should look for the big wood in their eye (or wherever it was) rather than to the tiny one in someone else's eyes... (sorry my translation of it might be poor).

Sure, if you are wrong that might not hurt at all, but still... you asked that to him, did he ask the same to you? or did you ask yourself?

As for the rest, I think I am a nihilist too yeah, and I was depressed for a while. And when I started to feel nihlistic and depressed and all, that's when going to the church became harder and harder until I stopped and became shuly agnostic, and now I feel more convinced than ever of my ideas...I sort of feel good in it cos for me it's much better than believing in other things.

[Lilac_R]

Excuse me but... and do you ever wonder if it is your side that's wrong? I'm not meaning to provoke but this question came to me so naturally while reading yours...

Nice repartee!
ok, my answer is: No! i've never thought that i might b wrong.not out of pride, but out of deep faith. so the question will b modified to "r u dead sure that u r 100% right as i am?!! is ur faith in wut u believe, wutsoever it is, that firm and deep that it could never ever b shaken?" i'm saying that coz i've always got that feeling that that friend has never been so sure, always hesitant, and when it comes to questions like "then who created that universe and what is it that makes u try hard to do the good thing (like having good morals n doing ur best), his reply makes me astonished when he says : well, i don care whether there was really a creator 4 that universe or not, n i'm doing what i do just 4 the hell of it coz i just believe in concepts!"
that really drives me up the wall..so i always think, there must b sth wrong..

[mono]

I once read a beautiful and wise analogy relating to the perception and "knowing" of reality, what seems just, and the idea of a Supreme Being.
An elephant rest on the ground, and multiple blind people arrived to identify the large creature; one felt its belly and thought it large, rough, and thick; another touched its ear and thought it flat, smooth, and wide; another touched its tusk and that it round, narrow, and long.
As in Immanuel Kant's concept (in his Critique Of Pure Reason), literally "knowing" everything of the transcendent seems impossible for a human's finite mind. In my opinion, we, as individuals, only perceive the smallest of fragments of any kind of objective reality, yet none of those fragments seems irrelevant; the elephant's tusk seems just as attached to the elephant as its ear and belly.
Calling one religion or spiritual belief superior or inferior to another communicates only that either all of us seem collectively correct, or all of us seem entirely wrong.

[Satirical]

I believe Hume said something along the lines of, if this religion is right then all others are wrong. Of course he was writing about miracles. Still....

[Koa]

Nice repartee!
ok, my answer is: No! i've never thought that i might b wrong.not out of pride, but out of deep faith. so the question will b modified to "r u dead sure that u r 100% right as i am?!! is ur faith in wut u believe, wutsoever it is, that firm and deep that it could never ever b shaken?" i'm saying that coz i've always got that feeling that that friend has never been so sure, always hesitant, and when it comes to questions like "then who created that universe and what is it that makes u try hard to do the good thing (like having good morals n doing ur best), his reply makes me astonished when he says : well, i don care whether there was really a creator 4 that universe or not, n i'm doing what i do just 4 the hell of it coz i just believe in concepts!"
that really drives me up the wall..so i always think, there must b sth wrong..

Ok...so I guess that that's the difference between faith, as in religious faith, and not being faithful... And faith is just something I don't understand, because I don't have it (pretty much as I don't understand love cos I don't have it).
I only think that you should accept that your friend does things just for the sake of them, because as I said before faith is only something you can feel, and if you don't feel it then you don't, end of story - and your life can be somehow complete anyway, even with your own views which may be painful and not as hopeful as a believer's ones... but they are ours, and I just prefer to have my pessimist nihilist ideas, because they are mine and came from my experience, rather than pretend to have faith and spend one hour every week in the church wondering why I'm there.

[sir]

being on the right side / being on the wrong side ...jeeeeezuz krist!!!!!!!

think! think! think!!!!!!!!!!

for ****'s sake!!! "god" is just a concept,undemonstrable,utterly subjective,a postulate created by human's ancestral fears,anguishes,loneliness and cultivated through terror,lie,superstition and by our species' innermost conflict itself:awareness of death!

if one is honest with oneself,one knows one comes from nowhere and soon will go back to nowhere...lucidity is the greatest humiliation the human being must endure...a great deal of it can lead to suicide or to the edge of it.

thus ,depending on our level of lucidity,our character,education,etc.,we are chosen (we never chose) by a specific religion,doctrine,philosophy,weltanschauung...ther e's no escape,even the anarchy,the atheism,the agnosticism,etc. can b included within the large meaning of "doctrine".

therefore,talking about "the right side" or "the wrong side" in such a delicate matter shows how shallow one's thinking is...
is not wrong to believe in god and is not wrong to be atheist...these are metaphysic needs based on unstable postulates either:
-the order in the universe is not necesarely a sign that some god created it.
-the unjustice and misery in the world is not enough proof against the existence of a superior entity.

even though i am more scared of the people with a firm belief...the inquisitors were 100% sure they were right and those who didn't believe in their god deserved to dye, the muslim kamikazes are 100% sure they are right and if u don't believe what they believe they have the right to kill u.
a man who doubts would never kill or give his life on behalf of an idea .

believe in god if u r confortable with that,don't question on what u believe in if u can't or don't want to,but please,respect your interlocutor's inteligence by not coming forth with sophisms or kindergarden statements in metaphisic debates.

[Lilac_R]

if one is honest with oneself,one knows one comes from nowhere and soon will go back to nowhere

I AM honest with myself, and i know very well i came from somewhere.


-the order in the universe is not necesarely a sign that some god created it.
-the unjustice and misery in the world is not enough proof against the existence of a superior entity.

Can anyone live with those two ideas at the same time?Can anyone bring two extremes togther n say i'm ok with that? well, if so, then u r a super-human being!


even though i am more scared of the people with a firm belief...the inquisitors were 100% sure they were right and those who didn't believe in their god deserved to dye, the muslim kamikazes are 100% sure they are right and if u don't believe what they believe they have the right to kill u.
a man who doubts would never kill or give his life on behalf of an idea .

well, i guess u haven't read wut i wrote carefully.. i said i got an atheist friend, a dear one, & fortunately i haven't killed him yet! (mayb i'll do it in the future, not coz he's not a muslim, but coz his bad temper always drives me crazy!) Plz, Sir, i wish u read more about Islam, there is no killing there, if one doesn't wanna b a muslim, then it's absolutely ok with us, no problem at all, i won't hang them 4 not believing in the same thing i believe in, coz as Koa said, belief is sth inside u n u cannot pretend to have it unless u really do, nor anyone can ever compell u to adhere to sth u don really believe in.

Koa said:

I just prefer to have my pessimist nihilist ideas, because they are mine and came from my experience, rather than pretend to have faith and spend one hour every week in the church wondering why I'm there.

I agree on and respect this.but at the same time i just wonder if one might undergo any feeling of "lack" or "incompleteness" towards one's own life(it does happen when one is a believer too but mayb in a different sense(?!))That friend told me more than once that he feels his life is wasted, being pointless..and this hurts a lot n it even sometimes makes one not very productive..does this apply to all nonbelievers?or it's just a trait?

[sir]

my last post in this thread ... related 2 nothing and nobody,just so,for the record...

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein
-------------------

"Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven"
amen!

[Logos]

my last post in this thread ... related 2 nothing and nobody,just so,for the record...


Well ok.. was just going to say, please, discuss ideas, not the posters who have expressed said ideas :)

[Ancestor]

Now I shouldn't step into someone else's discussion (but since when I do things I should do) but I really see no point in arguing cos noone is really trying to convince anyone, but of course noone will understand the other's point completely. I also sort of feel uncomfortable about believers always going on about how good it is to believe and implying between lines (and I think that they don't always realise it) that we are missing something, but that's also part of my present feeling of total refuse of anything that has to do with any kind of religious believe... So I probably also sound 'arrogant' at times cos we unbelievers also have that kind of way... But that doesnt mean that we are trying to convince each other cos we all (should) know that it's impossible, even if there are people who still try (that is, my grandmother...).

I do not feel you sound arrogant to me you sound like you are a happy person who just happens to not believe in a higher being. People tend to lump everyone who has the same faith as believing the same when in fact we do not. You are right you should be free to be a atheist without anyone saying, 'hey aren't you worried about your soul.' Your Grandmother sounds like mine and because even though we are both Spiritualist I do not practice our faith correctly but I still love her. Even though small strokes have affected her mind I let her say and let it go. I enjoy listening to all of you who believe or not believe. I was depressed before I found faith it is interesting to find someone opposite of me and anyway we can get out of a depression is a good way in my book.

[Ancestor]

being on the right side / being on the wrong side ...jeeeeezuz krist!!!!!!!

think! think! think!!!!!!!!!!

for ****'s sake!!! "god" is just a concept,undemonstrable,utterly subjective,a postulate created by human's ancestral fears,anguishes,loneliness and cultivated through terror,lie,superstition and by our species' innermost conflict itself:awareness of death!

if one is honest with oneself,one knows one comes from nowhere and soon will go back to nowhere...lucidity is the greatest humiliation the human being must endure...a great deal of it can lead to suicide or to the edge of it.

thus ,depending on our level of lucidity,our character,education,etc.,we are chosen (we never chose) by a specific religion,doctrine,philosophy,weltanschauung...ther e's no escape,even the anarchy,the atheism,the agnosticism,etc. can b included within the large meaning of "doctrine".

therefore,talking about "the right side" or "the wrong side" in such a delicate matter shows how shallow one's thinking is...
is not wrong to believe in god and is not wrong to be atheist...these are metaphysic needs based on unstable postulates either:
-the order in the universe is not necesarely a sign that some god created it.
-the unjustice and misery in the world is not enough proof against the existence of a superior entity.

even though i am more scared of the people with a firm belief...the inquisitors were 100% sure they were right and those who didn't believe in their god deserved to dye, the muslim kamikazes are 100% sure they are right and if u don't believe what they believe they have the right to kill u.
a man who doubts would never kill or give his life on behalf of an idea .

believe in god if u r confortable with that,don't question on what u believe in if u can't or don't want to,but please,respect your interlocutor's inteligence by not coming forth with sophisms or kindergarden statements in metaphisic debates.

This is such a fascinating example of narrow mindness that I have ever seen and I do apologize for my rude behavior but you sir do not understand what faith truly is. I am intelligent and I no longer fear and how come you imply people with faith are inferior to you. Is that not a God complex your words imply that you are suffering from. I have no problem with someone being atheist but I also feel that a atheist is as smart as I am and just as happy being a atheist as I am at being a Spiritualist. I once again apologize for my rude behavior and if I misunderstood your words sir then please try to make yourself appear less hostile. By the way I did chose my faith because I do not like anyone choosing for me.

[Tuana]

Atheists don't believe in a concept of religion and God. For them, God is only for something people cannot explain. That's the common idea of Atheists. And Using scientific explainations such as "Evolution Theory of Darvin" is more logical than saying : "My God created this, that, these, those or etc etc..."
Being born and dying is only biological events and have no divine meaning for them. People are born and die. That's all...Simple...Heaven, hell, satan etc. are something they don't believe in.

PS: I am an Atheist but i have no intention to attack the other people's opinions and beliefs. I just wanted to say my opinion about Atheism... Best Regards...

[Ancestor]

Atheists don't believe in a concept of religion and God. For them, God is only for something people cannot explain. That's the common idea of Atheists. And Using scientific explainations such as "Evolution Theory of Darvin" is more logical than saying : "My God created this, that, these, those or etc etc..."
Being born and dying is only biological events and have no divine meaning for them. People are born and die. That's all...Simple...Heaven, hell, satan etc. are something they don't believe in.

PS: I am an Atheist but i have no intention to attack the other people's opinions and beliefs. I just wanted to say my opinion about Atheism... Best Regards...

You showed respect and I hope that my words did not offend you also. Thanks for sharing your opinion and I hope we can hear more from you. I do apologize though for my attitude towards sir but I felt like he stepped upon my beliefs without any respect. I am a person whom is happy with her own skin and wish people would accept that about each other. We all live with something or without something but if we are truly happy then what is so wrong about that? Not a thing in my book. Loki's signature proudly states that he is atheist. I like Loki he is one of many who people brighten up this forum. But when someone comes off insulting I do act out and that is not a excuse for my behavior. For all atheist or not whom may have been offended by my last few posts I do apologize. I shall try to maintain my proper etiquette from now on.

[Dyrwen]

Atheists don't believe in a concept of religion and God. For them, God is only for something people cannot explain. That's the common idea of Atheists.
Technically you're presuming religion has to do with god, which it doesn't. It has to do with worship, dogma, ritual, belief in a concept of great importance. Atheists can have religions, just like theists can. Atheism and theism are two spectrums of a metaphysical hierarchy. Atheists are theists are at the top, then connected to them are their respective religions which certain atheists and theists partake in, below that are the common philosophical concepts, below that political, and on and on.

Universism (an odd offshoot that sounds too much like UU), certain sects of Buddhism, Unitarian Universalist, LaVeyian Satanism, Humanism, etc are all "atheist" religions. They hold no belief in gods and still follow a dogma of a sort to make their lives better suited to hold meaning for them. Some of these religions include theists as well, but generally speaking they don't require deities to be believed in.

Just thought you might like to know.

[Koa]

if one is honest with oneself,one knows one comes from nowhere and soon will go back to nowhere...lucidity is the greatest humiliation the human being must endure...a great deal of it can lead to suicide or to the edge of it.
Wow, this just sums up so perfectly my theory about life... I think that the only people who can be happy are those who haven't seen the truth, that is the meaningless of life and many other things... And when, 6 years ago, I found out all this, my lucidity was really taking me down and down...



even though i am more scared of the people with a firm belief...the inquisitors were 100% sure they were right and those who didn't believe in their god deserved to dye, the muslim kamikazes are 100% sure they are right and if u don't believe what they believe they have the right to kill u.
a man who doubts would never kill or give his life on behalf of an idea .


I actually agree on this... I don't know if the muslim kamikazes are following religious ideas or just political ideas, but they are way too convinced about them... And many people who believe in a god just try to convince the others... I think doubting can be healthy at times...


Koa said:

Quote:
I just prefer to have my pessimist nihilist ideas, because they are mine and came from my experience, rather than pretend to have faith and spend one hour every week in the church wondering why I'm there.



I agree on and respect this.but at the same time i just wonder if one might undergo any feeling of "lack" or "incompleteness" towards one's own life(it does happen when one is a believer too but mayb in a different sense(?!))That friend told me more than once that he feels his life is wasted, being pointless..and this hurts a lot n it even sometimes makes one not very productive..does this apply to all nonbelievers?or it's just a trait?

That's what I was trying to say... I do feel like that, all the time... useless - but that's not because I think that life has no meaning...well if I also think about it it does add to it, but with what I said and you quoted I wanted to say this... that I dont fee like I lack something cos I have no faith, because I feel that what I think is ok, it's right for me to think that... I can't really explain maybe but I dont feel poorer...


I do not feel you sound arrogant to me you sound like you are a happy person who just happens to not believe in a higher being

Oh then I should sound more depressed... ;) I'm not happy, I don't think happiness really exists, I prefer to call it 'joy' cos I think it can't last long...
Ok, lately I don't feel depressed most of them, I just feel ok and enjoy some things... so if happiness is just the lack of pain, then maybe I'm generally happy these days.

[Ancestor]

Does life have meaning only when one gives it meaning? By telling ourselves that life is not going to get any better we make it come true ourselves? I can tell myself that my life is going nowhere and in the end I turn out to be right. Dwelling on anything good or bad does not help just get up and do it. Make your life have meaning through any number of things. I won't be go back into my darken world where I did not care about anyone especially myself. Then it would truly be a empty lonly and pathetic life which would be no ones fault but my own. I have only seen a few people here who break to stereotype mold of atheists. I do not know about you but I am tired of people stereotyping and placing me in bounderies. Bounderies bound me in one place for far too long in my life and would rather live life to the fullist no matter what. You make your life what it is instead just take as it comes. I may not know my purpose but who is to say I am not living today. I took care of my dying Grandfather and I was there when he took his last breath. It made me proud to be there for that because he always smiled every day of his life which brightened mine. His own Mother bragged about how many times she tried to bring on a abortion while she carried him. She threw herself downs stairs to have a miscarry but he survived to be born and his presence in the world was brighter for it at least to me. If we humans were meant to live in a world of nothingness then we would not have people whom we love with all our being. :)

[Dyrwen]

Just because the world has no purpose and our lives no ultimate meaning doesn't mean we cannot continue to live with our own sense of purpose. Nothingness awaits us in death, which is why we enjoy or experience life as best we can while we're here. For me, life is neither good nor bad, it just is. It's better than death so I do not dwell on it. I focus on the bad and the good in any case, because I can't avoid it, but don't expect anything grand from either.

Life has a purpose: To live. If you add anything else to it, you're stretching it for more than it can be, personally speaking.

[Ancestor]

Why cannot life have both purpose and nothingness? Why do we think so one dimential when the world is not? Otherwise why have life at all if there is no purpose, no meaning, and nothing awaits us after death? Life is never just one single thing I have had patches of nothingness along patches filled with purpose. I do not think a few words can truly describe life but that life is a ongoing learning process and I for one will enjoy as much as I can.

[Dyrwen]

I didn't say we can't have both. I said life after death is nothingness and life as it is has no ultimate purpose, but its purpose is decided by those living it. Why live when nothing awaits you anyway? Because it beats being dead. You got one shot at this world, so use it however you want. Be happy, be sad, be whatever. Have a purpose or don't, it might help you it might not. Life is just here to be lived, make it what you want, but it won't matter in the long run from a individual aspect.

[Ancestor]

I did not mean to imply that you did not say we could not have both. I do believe that only our physical bodies die and that our spirit lives on afterwards. The nothingness that awaits when we die is a depressing thought to me at least. Plus since I am able to feel spiritual energy that does persuades me to believe that way. But each to his or her own I guess. ;)

[Satirical]

To say with all the conviction in the world, that there is nothing on the other side, to say that there is even another side, or not, is just as fallacious as any religion. Nothing is something in virtue of it being nothing.

[subterranean]

Posted by Koa: I don't know if the muslim kamikazes are following religious ideas or just political ideas, but they are way too convinced about them... And many people who believe in a god just try to convince the others... I think doubting can be healthy at times...

This reminds me of Plato alegory of cave. In a way, people who considered them selves enlightened and already found the truth, have this mental obligation to spread the words and convince them to follow the same steps. In Islam and Christianity, that obligation is obviously stated. Further, there are heavenly rewards waiting for "all out" believers. That's why death is a popular option in expressing the faith.
Sometimes I think philosophy is somewhat similiar with religious teachings and philosophers are acting like preachers, spreading the ideas of truth. The difference is we are free to doubt and, as you said Koa, that can keep us healty at times.

[Ancestor]

To say with all the conviction in the world, that there is nothing on the other side, to say that there is even another side, or not, is just as fallacious as any religion. Nothing is something in virtue of it being nothing.

Prove it to me and may change my point of view. Beside you make it sound so bleak and empty when for me it is not. I know there is another kind of life other than a physical one. Why limit us to one type of life?

[Tuana]

I think we cannot prove something and there is nothing to do except arguing about religion or God :) We cannot prove it just like we cannot prove being of God. It is %50 possibility and people can believe in either of them. There is no proof. And if there is a %50 possibility, to believe or not to believe are both logical (i think) :nod:
Best Regards...

[Sabin Stargem]

Currently, I do not hold much belief about the existence of the God(s), supernatural and whatnot. I probably will hold this concept to my death. What is much more important than disbelieving such things, is to be unwilling to serve. By this...I mean, I would not willing give my loyalty - my faith, to them. If I were to die, and find that they do indeed exist, I would not surrender my independence to them.

Why is that important? Well, I did not trust them in the first place - I would have to accept the consequences of my lack of faith. To stand by it in fact. This does not mean I hate the Gods, though I can dislike them. I more or less see them as powerful, flawed people.

[Ancestor]

Then how can either one of us be right if we cannot prove or disprove the existance of God or even life after death? Point we believe what we wish to believe and for me I have my own proof but I could not prove it to you nor should I. That would be stepping upon your toes and that is not proper for me to do. I do not think you will have consequences after death for not believing in any type of God or idol. Unless you committ murder before you die then that is a different story. Belief for me is giving to power for growth of one's self and even in a higher being or not. I do want to thank you all for the insight and I am learning more each time I visit. :)

[Satirical]

Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.

[Deus]

"Why cannot life have both purpose and nothingness? Why do we think so one dimential when the world is not? Otherwise why have life at all if there is no purpose, no meaning, and nothing awaits us after death? Life is never just one single thing I have had patches of nothingness along patches filled with purpose. I do not think a few words can truly describe life but that life is a ongoing learning process and I for one will enjoy as much as I can." - Ancestor

I'm a little confused as to how you jumped from saying life should ecompass both nothingness and purpose and then rather quickly accuse nothingness for making life pointless. Somehow I feel the idea of living for the sake of living has been lost. Its cropped up a few times, and I was glad to see this view brought forth. For what is wrong with living in a way that makes one happy and content? Nothing, it would be foolish to say there was some great flaw in living in such a manner, providing such a life abided in some sense an ethical and moral code, and followed laws. Who could fault peacefulness and such a contented existence?

Seize the day, live in the moment, live as if it will be your last.

While the last may be a bit dark, the message holds true. Live in the now and don't worry about what might happen later. Be content in the knowledge that you're a good person. Why does it matter if there is nothing after death, it should not change the way life is percieved. Life is a precious state that should be enjoyed and lived as happily as possible, with the thought of what may come after saved till the occassion arises.

After all, these questions will all be answered when we die. :P

[Ancestor]

I meant that we all have spots in our life where we feel nothingness and there are spots in life where we feel purpose. Nothing is clear in the beginning our journeys and I surely for one have felt both but you are live your life as happy as you can be.

[blp]

Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.

Everything that might be proof of god might equally well be a trick.

[dejosc]

Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.

thats a stupid thing to say, going on that basis i could say that Seattle is actually a piece of plastic as no-one has given me solid proof that its there and i have not been there.

[Satirical]

You can say what you will, it is meant for one to keep an open mind about everything. If you would rather agree with dogma then that is for you. If you would rather not than that is equally up to you. The problem with this subject is the attempt at being universal when universal was as incomplete a topic as the "soul".

No strong convictions. And maybe somewhere there is a piece of plastic named Seattle, or maybe it is not, either way that would not be the problem would it?

As far as proof for God being a trick then it may very well be and it may not, once again either way there is no point in such a circular discussion involving it. We have a tendency to view problems as problems if they are unsolvable, instead of soluble. Some things in life are part and the base of life. Or even the origin lol.

[MiSaNtHrOpE]

There is no evidence of God's existence, and it helps to look at things objectively. God's existence is a circular (invalid) argument:
"P1" is Premise 1
P1: God inspired the Bible
P2: Everything the Bible says is true
C: God exists.

One cannot accept this argument if he does not already believe in God. After reading the Bible objectively, as a piece of literature without religious significance, it is hard for me to understand why anyone can take the book seriously, let alone literally. The things that God does in the OT are incredibly cruel, sexist, and "bad," especially comparing the laws and actions to our modern society.

Take Adam and Eve, for example. Adam and Eve eat from the Tree of Knowledge and God punishes them. First, God must have planted the Tree in the first place, and second, what does that say about Him except that he wants his followers to be ignorant?

Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 explicitly states that disobedient children can be lawfully murdered.

And how about poor Job, his life destroyed because of a little game between Satan and God? Does God really not care about human life?

I also do not feel that Jesus' actions make up for his Father's abuse of Humanity. Thousands of years before Jesus was Gotama Buddha, a far more benevolent teacher without an abusive Father. Buddha's teachings, also, did not result in widespread violence, sexism, and corruption thousands of years later.

As for Creationism/Intelligent Design, the idea is compatable with anything. "God put the bones there." It's a circular argument, again, and is wholly unacceptable if the listener doesn't accept God's existence in the first place.

[Satirical]

Just as a side note, where I am from everyone seems to believe that the greatest thing about the Bible is that it was written by several people, but is as one. I bring this up because you brought up Job, and to this I say, Come on people! That story is written completely different from the rest! It is incredible what people accept as they have been primed as it were. Another thing about it being so concise is that the church fathers excluded many "apocrapha" that they conveniently thought was not divinly inspired. Once again, Come on! Check this out misanthrope, you may enjoy it as much as I do http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/

[yellowfeverlime]

they don't believe in anything. They believe NOTHING!

[MiSaNtHrOpE]

Just as a side note, where I am from everyone seems to believe that the greatest thing about the Bible is that it was written by several people, but is as one. I bring this up because you brought up Job, and to this I say, Come on people! That story is written completely different from the rest! It is incredible what people accept as they have been primed as it were. Another thing about it being so concise is that the church fathers excluded many "apocrapha" that they conveniently thought was not divinly inspired. Once again, Come on! Check this out misanthrope, you may enjoy it as much as I do http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/

It doesnt matter who wrote which section, I know it was written by several people, but Christians believe it just the same. I am referring to the widely-accepted, traditional Bible, not the omitted texts. Not only that, but you are avoiding my arguments. :flare:

It's not true that atheists believe nothing. I believe what is earthly, objectively provable, and externally valid. I tend to be very skeptical of people who say "God told me," and I will NOT jump into his bandwagon to give him all of my money for a free ticket to Heaven.

There is a big misconception that atheists have inadequate morality, and this is simply not true. Atheists do good things purely because they want to and find satisfaction in it, not because a Big Brother/Santa Claus figure is watching their every move. In fact, many studies found, such as the Journal of Religion & Society and The Science of Good & Evil by Michael Shermer (Copyright 2004), that the more religious a person, or a society as a whole, is, the more likely he will do bad things, or the more "social ills" that society will have. The JoRS can be found here: http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

[Satirical]

I was unaware that we were in confrontation. I thought that I had made it clear that the discussion was circular to begin with. Even with the misunderstanding, I say that we are still in agreement. You have said nothing that I have not thought myself. I was merely pointing out something humorous to me in the context of the discussion.

You are right by the way, it does not matter who wrote that compilation of ancient myths, but I guess my sarcasm was lost in the writing. Either way, I do agree.

[blp]

they don't believe in anything. They believe NOTHING!

'Nothing is better than nothing' - Samuel Beckett

Read the Tao Te Ching.

[subterranean]

I don't think atheist believe nothing...I mean I think they do believe in friendship, love, humanity.. just don't believe in divine being...


There is a big misconception that atheists have inadequate morality, and this is simply not true.

I'm a theist, but I do agree with you there Misanthrope

[bhekti]

... Atheists do good things purely because they want to and find satisfaction in it, ....


So when they do those good things, they are doing them purely for themselves. Good.

[Ancestor]

So when they do those good things, they are doing them purely for themselves. Good.Excellent point and well stated. :nod:

[subterranean]

So when they do those good things, they are doing them purely for themselves. Good.


Not always. You can't put aside the fact that sometimes people do things based on motives, that relates to certain interest and needs towards other people.

[Satirical]

If they do things for themselves, then they are being driven by a motive, albut an egotistical one, but a motive nonetheless. When it is said this is good, how good is it if it is self motivated? Gratification seems to be a bad word that could possibly be applied her.

[MiSaNtHrOpE]

You totally missed the point. The point isnt that they feel they would get ahead if they do something good, its just general kindness and satisfaction by way of positive emotions that result from that gracious act. You maybe return someone's lost wallet and you feel good about doing that, only without the brownie points with God.

How do religious people decide when to do things? I'd rather have someone help me because he wants to out of genuine kindness, not because he wants a ticket to Heaven. I'd rather he help me because of self-motivation than to be ego-centric with the supernatural. (My friend is Catholic purely because he wants to go to Heaven.)

[bhekti]

.... its just general kindness and satisfaction by way of positive emotions that result from that gracious act. ...


This, then, is atheists' theism.

[Satirical]

I am afraid that you have missed the point. I know what you mean and the individual will still gain some level of egotistical satisfaction. Think outside the box for a minute.

FYI Nobody really believes in heaven, not REALLY

[Psycheinaboat]

FYI Nobody really believes in heaven, not REALLY

Okay, I admit that I haven't been following this thread that closely and perhaps have missed something.

Your post stuck out to me and I had to ask what you mean by this. I am not chosing a side to debate, I am just curious.

[Satirical]

I am joking really, I cannot say that for sure. I myself was raised in the heartland of the American Bible Belt and at a young age thought to myself that people do not really believe the scripture, and they were all just acting. I am sure that I am wrong and that some people do believe, but this is here nor there.

[Psycheinaboat]

I see. Well, your post made me think, so that's a good thing.

Your comment made me wonder about how many people truly believe in Heaven, as in it being a paradise where the faithful reap the reward of a good life, and how many just consider it a better fate than Hell.

As a child I had a Bible school teacher who described Heaven as if it was a never-ending church service with constant worship and singing. That did not leave me all that enthused about my options for the afterlife. :)

[Satirical]

I think, and do not quote me on this, that influences of an industrial society, existential, and rebelliousness in those aspects has a large bearing on the way our generation thinks about things of this nature. We are raised to be obedient and commercial with a wide array of technology opening up other possibilities, and showing us other perspectives that make us question. When I was young I doubted my faith for the first time when I realized it to be not a universal position. It has never recovered and probably never will.
I also read much comparative mythology and that may influence me. Influences, however, are another topic in these regards.

[bhekti]

A true atheist is a sensitive person, a very sensitive person. He/she is honest, upright, and reasonable, very reasonable. What is lacking in him/her is patience.

[Satirical]

And all Cretans are liars.

[subterranean]

overrated......


A true atheist is a sensitive person, a very sensitive person. He/she is honest, upright, and reasonable, very reasonable. What is lacking in him/her is patience.

[subterranean]

It's unfair to generalize theists with such argument. Theist may do good deeds with the reason of humanity, love, or even for the sake of kindness it self. Punishment and rewards may become considerations to some theists, but not always. And I believe not all (or always) atheists do such thing called "genuine goods"....



How do religious people decide when to do things? I'd rather have someone help me because he wants to out of genuine kindness, not because he wants a ticket to Heaven. I'd rather he help me because of self-motivation than to be ego-centric with the supernatural. (My friend is Catholic purely because he wants to go to Heaven.)

[Loki]

A true atheist is a sensitive person, a very sensitive person. He/she is honest, upright, and reasonable, very reasonable. What is lacking in him/her is patience.

That's nice of you to say, Bhekti, and very generous...but I don't know if it can really be applied to all atheists. An atheist is merely someone who does not believe in a god or gods; nothing more. It would be nice if all atheists were ethical, sensitive, and reasonable, but I'm afraid that would be something of a dream. Every atheist is different, an atheist is (usually) not part of a set group - each atheist can go his or her own way.

Of course there are atheists exactly how you described out there; however I feel that sensitivity and reasonableness can't be called general traits of the atheist. ;) Some atheists are very unreasonable, and some very skeptical, insensitive, etc. etc. and they're still atheists.

:) Loki

[Satirical]

Contrary to popular belief, and I mean POPULAR belief, ethics and religion are very, very different things. To say someone of some faith or not is not to say that they are good or bad. I think this is called the non sequitor fallacy.(It does not follow)

[MiSaNtHrOpE]

Just as not all theists are good people, especially considering the dire straits of religion today, with both Islamic and Christian extremism, and, unfortunately, these people are wrongfully famous and their "warnings" about gays, endorsement of racism/sexism, and anti-sex attitudes are heeded by the majority. The UCC (United Church of Christ), however, is the first Christian organization to speak against their hateful brethren, and I do hope more outcry from the moderates follows suit.

[A Hard Rain]

Am i the only one who could not keep from laughing through this whole thread?

Some situation we have!

But really, I was just hoping that someone was going to tell those 2 off.
I mean really lay it on thick.
(not in an offensive way, but just an eye opener) :eek2:

I was going to jump into the fray, but It has slowed.
Exhausted from going around.
It needed some fire somewhere along the line.
Maybe a car bomb.

[Logos]

Am i the only one who could not keep from laughing through this whole thread?

Some situation we have!

But really, I was just hoping that someone was going to tell those 2 off.
I mean really lay it on thick.
(not in an offensive way, but just an eye opener) :eek2:

I was going to jump into the fray, but It has slowed.
Exhausted from going around.
It needed some fire somewhere along the line.
Maybe a car bomb.

Glad you're enjoying the topic :)

We try to be as respectful as possible to others and their opinions and faith, but I daresay it's difficult for some.

[Satirical]

But really, I was just hoping that someone was going to tell those 2 off.
I mean really lay it on thick.
(not in an offensive way, but just an eye opener)

By all means, please.

[subterranean]

Well, why don't you take the honour and be that so-called "eye opener"...


Am i the only one who could not keep from laughing through this whole thread?

Some situation we have!

But really, I was just hoping that someone was going to tell those 2 off.
I mean really lay it on thick.
(not in an offensive way, but just an eye opener) :eek2:

[MrBojangles]

My eyes are already opened after this discussion. Yet the thought keeps haunting me, why is believing in nothingness after death, depressing, I dare-say i accepted that as fact ever since.. i don't know when.. and its casted into the long list of the biological ( not devine ) ways of life, such as evolution, or lack of higher power and devine path. Thus being the "oh well" situations of life.

[Ancestor]

My eyes are already opened after this discussion. Yet the thought keeps haunting me, why is believing in nothingness after death, depressing, I dare-say i accepted that as fact ever since.. i don't know when.. and its casted into the long list of the biological ( not devine ) ways of life, such as evolution, or lack of higher power and devine path. Thus being the "oh well" situations of life.

Why should there have to be nothingness after death? It is not depressing to me but I do not feel having a after life should mean that you have faith in a higher being. I would love to be a spirit and travel around the world without having to hand out cash for it. :) In truth we believe what be want to believe about life after death. Personally have felt spiritual energy has helped me accept that there is. If your beliefs or if you do not believe and you are happy with the person you are then that is more important. I know I had said that before so forgive me repeating myself. :)

[MrBojangles]

What does this spiritual energy feel like? And it sounds like to me, that having a happy ending (life after death) is just hot air or wishful thinking, you can go as far to say that some sort of higher power (god etc.) is to. I see the downside of these hopes (in which the events in history has taught us) and that is why I'am atheist.

[Ancestor]

What does this spiritual energy feel like? And it sounds like to me, that having a happy ending (life after death) is just hot air or wishful thinking, you can go as far to say that some sort of higher power (god etc.) is to. I see the downside of these hopes (in which the events in history has taught us) and that is why I'am atheist.

Why only see the downside of life when there is more then one side of life. They energy I can feel off of living and deceased is hard to describe but I can give you a example. I felt my sister's foot once and knew that she was going to lose it and three days after her 25 birthday the doctors amputated. I can still feel her amputated foot and knee it is a weird experience. I however do not feel it is hot air but having been lived part of my life without hope did not make me a happy person. I now deal with the bad and good but do not lose hope that my life wont' get any better anymore. That is up to me on whether it gets better or not. Caught a story tonight about a young man who had more physical pain then you could imagine. He had true courage to wake up each day and face the world. His disease was of the skin and it caused tremdous soars and even touch was painful. Never complained out load and made others laugh. Never lost hope of being free from his when death came and that was not hot air for him but a tool to survive. Sorry to get hot and no offense is intened and I hope I was not offensive to you. If so my apologies.

[Chava]

I personally find that the concept of afterlife is merely a form of reasurrence, "all right so you messed it up this time, no sweat, have another go." to those who wish to believe in that, I have no concern. However for several religions, the afterlife was a threat, a means of controling the people. The entire concept of paying for your sins to encourage people to treat each other better. My concern is the misuse that this power has led to, and the indulgence. People could pay their sins away, by giving money to the church (just an example) Killing a man was possible, and all the while i am convinced that the big losers in all this were the poor, and the people left without a choice, while the big winners were the arch bishops, and the rich men, who could get away with what was otherwise "sin". Pardon my opinion, but really? This is why my conviction is not for afterlife, i simply don't believe it. (of course other religions have different ideas, spirits, and kharma and what not.) But again, the point is to make you a better person in the current life by promising you a better life later.

[bhekti]

What does this spiritual energy feel like? And it sounds like to me, that having a happy ending (life after death) is just hot air or wishful thinking, you can go as far to say that some sort of higher power (god etc.) is to. I see the downside of these hopes (in which the events in history has taught us) and that is why I'am atheist.


Atheists are sensitive people people who, unfortunately, always forget that "If God does not exist, everything is permitted" (as the events of history has taught us)

PS: the quote is from Dostoevsky

[Countess]

Hello, I'm new - as in, I just joined 15 minutes ago, not as in I was born yesterday. I have always found the topic of God compelling, esp so many excellent authors have written extensively upon the subject.

I believe in God based on first principles and the ontological, cosmological, teleological arguments as well as Intelligent Design Theory, Pascal's Wager (although it has never converted a soul) as well as Anselms / Aquinas syllogistic proofs (yes, there is great layover between the forementioned.)

If one is a Christian of the reformed variety, one will readily recognize that all these arguments are made in vain; that is, that they have never converted a soul because they lack conversion *power*. The power of conversion obviously, lies with the converter, which is the Holy Spirit, or God.

Arguments, then, are not plied with the intent of convincing anyone of the existence of God since, as we have said, that is impossible. Rather, they exist as a means of reinforcing one's own faith and removing intellectual obstacles to faith, which are sundry and inhibiting.

Thus, no atheist shall ever grow to love God because he was presented with Aristotle's "Metaphysics" or Descartes "Meditations" or even anything written by John Piper. He will grow to love God because God reached down and touched his soul aka: it is the personal experience with God that is radically altering, and that is not something we can mimic with vainglorious humanistic reasoning.

T

[subterranean]

What do you mean exactly?



I would love to be a spirit and travel around the world without having to hand out cash for it. :)

[Ancestor]

What do you mean exactly?

I was trying to say that I believe we become spirits after we die. I do have faith in a higher being but even if you do not believe in higher being why should you not still believe in a after life.
And it sounds like to me, that having a happy ending (life after death) is just hot air or wishful thinking, you can go as far to say that some sort of higher power (god etc.) It made feel that why should we have nothingness in the after life whether believing in a higher being or not. I do and I also believe in life after death and it was not just hot air to me. When I becaome a Spirit I believe that I will be able to roam the physical plane to help guide the living. Hope that explains if not I will try again. Not feeling to well today but I thought I should try to answer you suterranean also you get the nicest avatars. :wave:

[A Hard Rain]

---- it, you've converted me.

Now I will recieve my rewards.

[Pendragon]

I see. Well, your post made me think, so that's a good thing.

Your comment made me wonder about how many people truly believe in Heaven, as in it being a paradise where the faithful reap the reward of a good life, and how many just consider it a better fate than Hell.

As a child I had a Bible school teacher who described Heaven as if it was a never-ending church service with constant worship and singing. That did not leave me all that enthused about my options for the afterlife. :)I've stayed off this thread on purpose, but in reading over the posts I wonder if I made the right decision. Most of you seem to be genuinely interested in discussing things. Psyche, sadly, many people do feel that way about religion. My two cents: It's not to be used as a fire escape. Christ went to the common man and woman, those society had kicked out, and the established church of His day jumped all over Him. But who needs the love of God more, the people in the church or the ones who may never darken a door? Remember the story Jesus told of the shepherd with 99 sheep in the fold and one lost. He will go after the one. I say to you that there is much difference between religion and salvation! Not everyone who attends church really has God working in their life. That makes it hard on people who are trying to use Christ as an example, and show the love of God to everyone, regardless. If I cannot feel for someone, if I have no compassion for what they go through, if all I do is stand around and condemn them, how can I ever expect them to trust me to help them? The best sermon you'll ever preach is the way you act and the way you live; the way you treat others.... :angel: :nod: :wave:

[Adelheid]

Agreed, Pen.... :thumbs_up:

[Pendragon]

Thanks for the support, Adelheid. Always appreciated. :thumbs_up :angel:

[emily655321]

Don't know why I'm chiming in, again, but I am. I would first like to say to Ancestor that I have great respect for you, and each one of your posts is beautiful and kind and wise, even when you get frustrated. You have not said anything I would consider offensive, in fact I wish I was as patient with others as you.

I also believe that everyone's belief is right. Not "right" meaning "correct," but "right" meaning "valid." Until I was 16 or 17 I was a very spiritual person, and felt in my heart a deep connection with God. And that was right, because it was a belief that I honestly felt in my heart, and I did charitable things and tried to love others and to appreciate all the beautiful things in the world. Now I no longer feel in my heart that there is a God, and no amount of prayer or reflection or church attendence is going to change that, but that is also right, because it is what I honestly feel, and I am not a worse person for it. I just lost faith, and now I wish I could be agnostic and say, "Maybe there is a God, maybe there isn't"—in fact, I'm striving toward that kind of acceptance,—but I can't truthfully say I'm agnostic, because I can't help believing that God just doesn't exist. I can't help it anymore than I could once have made myself not believe. It's just something that is either there or it isn't. And you know what? I still do charitable works, and I try not to hate others and to appreciate all the beautiful things in the world, and to do my best to make the bad better again. I do it because that, to me, is the purpose of life.

I did lose my faith when I became depressed, and I am still very depressed, for over five years now, but it was not because I felt God had wronged me somehow. Declaring oneself an atheist because "God would not allow such suffering in the world" seems like a very shallow argument to me. I think there is suffering in the world because human beings are the way we are; people will always misunderstand and hate one another, things will not always go the way we wish, viruses and bacteria and genetics will cause some people to be diseased, and endless other reasons, none of which have any basis in whether or not a higher power created them. I am depressed because the chemicals/electro-magnetic impulses in my head don't work right. I'm grateful for all the good things I have, I care deeply about other people, I am hopeful for the future, but the chemicals in the brain that trigger happiness in other people just don't work in mine. *shrug* It's not God's fault, and it's not a result of not believing in God; just is.

When people say they don't believe in God "because he let this bad thing happen to me," it is, to me, the ultimate example of belief. You can't hate something if you don't believe it's there. It is an example of refusing to worship God out of feelings of revenge, but is in itself a very sincere expression of faith.

How did I let another post of mine get so long? :confused: Sorry, folks. I'll conclude. Oh, afterlife: No, I don't believe there is such a thing as a spirit, so I don't believe it can continue on after the body is dead. I think what we feel as consciousness is the result of electro-magnetic activity in the brain, and when the brain dies, consciousness disappears, and that is the end of that. It doesn't make me sad; it makes death in general less sad to me, actually, I don't know why. It's less like someone leaving, and more like something being over and done.

Okay, so that's what this atheist is like. I hope it's helpful, somehow.


EDIT: I'd like to comment on how respectful and peaceful this area of the forum has become since the last time I was here. :) It seems it used to be all fighting and name-calling and no one really listening, and I love it this way. Thank you, everyone, for the effort and respect it takes to keep such discussions peaceful, even when some people try to turn it into a fight. I love and respect all of you!

[mike-eustace]

I am an atheist and believe completely in nothingness after death. Surely it's the most likely outcome. "Preposterous"...how so? I think that it's quite arrogant of humans to be unable to accept that we're not part of some great scheme.

If you believe your time alive is limited to that on Earth then you certainly want to make the most of it!

ME

[bhekti]

If you believe your time alive is limited to that on Earth then you certainly want to make the most of it!

ME
The most of it ...in what way?

[Adelheid]

I finally found out the difference between these 2 words. They are not the same, even though people link them to go hand in hand.

agnosticism means ignorance, the belief that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.

atheisticism is really the belief that there's no God.

That's the difference.... you get it?

[Pendragon]

I finally found out the difference between these 2 words. They are not the same, even though people link them to go hand in hand.

agnosticism means ignorance, the belief that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.

atheisticism is really the belief that there's no God.

That's the difference.... you get it?I don't know that I would word it that way, the word "ignorance" is such a harsh word. Beside the agnostic person believes that he or she is right. The word I would use is "doubt". The agnostic doubts the existence of God. It's a grey area. Maybe. Maybe not. I believe the Hebrew word is "timshel" meaning "it may be". An atheist has made his/her mind up that God does not exist, but the agnostic is still thinking, leaning towards the "not" camp, but with enough doubt to not go there. I put it like this sometimes: There are three, perhaps four, kinds of believers. Unbelievers--those who choose to believe there is no God. Believers--those who choose to believe in God. Make-believers--those who try to fool people into thinking they believe in God. And doubters--those who are genuinely unsure. :nod:

[Logos]

I would say "ignorance" is a harsh word, it has many negative connotations, someone here is bound to take exception to it :)

Emily, I am sorry you have been dealing with depression. Have you read The Noonday Demon by Andrew Solomon? It was published in 2001, but I think it is still relevant today as one of the most respected books ever written about depression.

[emily655321]

Emily, I am sorry you have been dealing with depression. Have you read The Noonday Demon by Andrew Solomon? It was published in 2001, but I think it is still relevant today as one of the most respected books ever written about depression.
I haven't read that, Logos. Thanks for the suggestion! :)

[RobinHood3000]

Atheism is the lack of a belief in a deity. Agnosticism is the belief that the presence of a deity can neither be proven NOR disproven. At least, that's my take on it. There is therefore some overlap, in which I fit.

It's ironic that, to hear some people tell it, the world is divided into Christians and Blasphemous Heathens (in which case, I have a BHA meeting next weekend). Even more ironic is how it took a Christian to make me a confirmed atheist. To use a mildly bizarre metaphor: I was standing on the Dock of Indecision, dipping my toes in the Sea of Atheism. It was a Christian who put me in concrete overshoes and pushed me off.

It's kind of a long story, but the main point is that a Christian missionary/youth group leader was speaking, and referred to Buddhism/Judaism/Confucianism/Islam/any non-Christian religion as "fairy-tale religions." Of course, this rubbed me the wrong way--what was worse was when, upon finding out I was an atheist, he promptly sought me out afterwards and began questioning my (non-)belief as if I'd entered the room through a smoking hole in the ground.

I came into this thread kind of late, so I apologize if what follows is somewhat haphazard and hackneyed.

Atheism is more a category than a specific form of belief. Trying to ask "What do atheists believe?" is no less ludicrous than asking "What do theists believe?"

What really busts my buttons is when people assume that atheism precludes morality, or worse, when people ask an atheist, "So nothing matters and I can do anything I want, no matter how immoral, and I won't ever be punished?" as if they think that asking the question will provoke instant conversion. One of my favorite phrases to use is, "It's not like I decided to be an atheist so I could sleep in on Sundays after Saturday night orgies"--for some reason, that conveys the desired message quite nicely, if I do say so myself.

Okay, that about does it for me for now. If anyone has any questions about my personal beliefs (and I stress "personal"), please feel free to ask, although I imagine it's somewhat egocentric of me to assume that people will significantly care.

[Pendragon]

Maybe this sounds rough, but have I not said time and again that the best sermon you preach is how you live and act, and the way you treat others? Attitude counts for a lot. As in sales, presentation counts for a lot. Sharing and caring means more than trying to force things down people's throats. :angel:

[ChuckBukowski]

Well I became an atheist for the very reason that I would be able to have endless orgies (preferrably with Christian girls) and live an otherwise debauched lifestyle. Also, when you're an atheist you get to be smart and have your own opinions.

[RobinHood3000]

I can't tell--is he kidding?

If not, I'm guessing his anthem is "Only the Good Die Young" by Billy Joel.

[Scheherazade]

It is expected that we have disagreements on various issues but please keep these disagreements within the bounds of common courtesy and respect each other's views.

If you find it to hard to do these, please feel free to ignore this section of the Forum.

[RobinHood3000]

Hmm...I'm not sure which poster Scheherazade is referring to, but as my post seemed curt in retrospect:

My apologies if my post offended, but I was hoping to make a light-hearted point of referring to the lyrics of the song, which seemed to fit astonishingly well with ChuckBukowski's described lifestyle.

[ChuckBukowski]

This is the Atheist forum, correct? Of course I cant talk, I probablly posted some less than friendly remarks on the Christianity forum. I like Christians, usually. But Im from the south, our Christians are quick to make derogatory comment about gays, minorities and whoever we happen to be at war with. And you ever notice that Atheists never get mad when someone criticizes their atheistic views, thats becasue they are secure in their beliefs. We only get mad when Christians try to prove their point by pulling some ambiguous bible verse outta their...bible instead of supporting their ideas with facts. Atheist : "I dont think God cares if gays get married". Christians : "And who so ever drinketh from the cup of another man will suffer unto the waves of the river Canan". Atheist : "Oh, I never thought of it that way, I think you're right, pardon me while I blow my freegin brains out". Ok I made up that bible verse, but you get my point.

[RobinHood3000]

Um, Mr. Bukowski, you're not only making generalizations about Christians, you're also making generalizations about atheists. That's generally not a good combination.

[ChuckBukowski]

Whats so wrong with generalizations? If I said , "generally Americans like french fries", would I be wrong? In the south Christians are genreally right leaning and conservative.

[RobinHood3000]

The problem is that, in your post, you didn't use "generally"--you simply gave the categorization "Christians" or "Atheists," which has an all-encompassing implication. You say that atheists never get mad when criticized, which I seriously doubt is true. You also suggest slightly that atheists are left-leaning, which not only approaches the political arena but is not without substantial exceptions, myself included.

And I'm almost afraid to ask: were you serious in your motives to become an atheist, as stated in your earlier post?

[ChuckBukowski]

Yes, thats correct, I became an atheist so I could have orgies with christian women. Its kinda like joining a rock band so you can get chicks. Because we all know that girls love it when you say, "hey baby, I dont believe in God, Im a souless cynical heathen, Ill take you staight to hell." C'mon...are you serious. Being an atheist is way harder than being a Christian in modern society. You know of any self-proclaimed atheist presidents? Or any politicians for that matter? And Im sorry but in a converstaion about Atheism and Christianity how can you not bring up politics, religion and politics are two sides of the same coin. "But the post says....", ya I know what the post says, calm down, I'm not getting into politics, just reality. As far as my generalizations are concerned, If anyone reading this had to place their money on whether or not atheists were generally more left leaning or right leaning, where would you place your money? Generally, I would like to know the answer, but dont bother to respond because I already know.

[Ancestor]

Well I have never heard of that reason for being a athiest and guess there is nothing wrong with unless your hurt someone's feelings. I find it hard to believe though that a women Christian or not would fall for such a terrible line. No offense intended towards you but you gave the impression women with beliefs are naive when faith or not that is not the case. I felt that people always have the wrong ideals when it comes to the opposite sex. Besides you do not have to be atheist to have a orgies.

[RobinHood3000]

Um...I think he established that he was kidding.

Just because it's harder to be an atheist doesn't mean that it's fair to demean the arguments of Christians. Yes, they're ludicrous upon occasion, but in such cases, I find it best to at least try and help the other person understand that any generalizations that are made about atheists (and as I'm sure you probably already know, they are varied and plentiful) are not necessarily founded in reality. I know well enough not to expect to convert anyone by talking about my atheism, and I don't want to. It's against my philosophy to try and qualify myself as absolutely, undeniably right in anything beyond factual basis.

[Diadem]

Atheist at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist)
"Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively believing in the non-existence of deities."

Couldn't have put it better.

I'd say I'm more agnostic-leaning than atheist because I don't negate the possibility (not probability) of a God existing, but I'd definitely agree with that definition.

Atheists have many beliefs, they just don't happen to be theistic in nature. I do not believe in any God for the time being because no such entity has proven itself to be real to me, however I do believe the existence of such a God is possible. In addition, I do however respect the beliefs of others who happen to have faith in such an entity. I believe we all have the freedom to choose and that is something we should definitely cherish.

Furthermore, I do not believe (oh, there goes that word again) that one must submit to religious doctrine or tenets in order to be a moral and upstanding person in this society. I've all too often heard from religious people that you need God in your life to be a good person because only the Bible or other religious doctrine can provide you with morals. I think that's not representative of the truth. I've seen religious people as well as atheists say one thing and do another, so being religious doesn't dictate your morality.

Above all else, I believe works, not faith alone, proves one's self to be a good person.

Just my two cents. I did subscribe to Pascal's wager at one point, but I feel that it wasn't an honest acceptance of God so I decided not to subscribe anymore until I was assured that such a God existed. If He is real as He says He is, He will show me the "light".

[Diadem]

...As far as my generalizations are concerned, If anyone reading this had to place their money on whether or not atheists were generally more left leaning or right leaning, where would you place your money? Generally, I would like to know the answer...

I'm responding anyway. :D

Left, my friend, and usually against the death penalty. What did I win? :thumbs_up

[Xamonas Chegwe]

I am an atheist and I believe that:

"The good I do is to my credit,
The evil to my shame,
No praise is due to God in heaven,
Nor Lucifer to blame."

And I hold this belief just as strongly as anyone of a religious persuasion holds theirs (and with just as many doubts, I dare say).

An agnostic doesn't believe in God but an atheist believes there is no God - it's an act of faith (believe it or not!)

[RobinHood3000]

Actually, an agnostic takes a neutral stance towards the presence of a deity. But yes, I'd say that pretty much sums it up.

[Xamonas Chegwe]

Actually, an agnostic takes a neutral stance towards the presence of a deity.

I must disagree. Not with what you say but with your implication that this contradicts me, which it doesn't.

An agnostic takes a neutral stance on God's existence, agreed - but this is not in contradiction to my point above - the agnostic does not believe - this is the key phrase - , either in God, or in the lack of a God, instead preferring to sit on the fence until such time as a convincing case is made either way. Neutrality on the point of God's reality is incompatible with any belief regarding the subject.

The atheist has been convinced and actively believes, albeit in God's non-existence. My whole point in responding to this thread was the initial premise (backed up by smilies) that any belief on the part of an atheist was laughable. I believe (there's that word again) that you cannot be an atheist without belief, merely an agnostic with pretensions.

You may well have gathered that I have a lower opinion of agnostics than I do any religious group! I hate people that can't make up their minds - lol.

[RobinHood3000]

Ehhh...I guess I can agree, but only when they're standing in line in front of me trying to decide on whether to get chicken or fish. Some agnostics might have the right idea in that they do not necessarily try to qualify themselves as absolutely right, which would be one of the first mistakes when debating religion.

[Xamonas Chegwe]

Some agnostics might have the right idea in that they do not necessarily try to qualify themselves as absolutely right, which would be one of the first mistakes when debating religion.

...and by far the commonest - lol

We all doubt. Such is Humanity's lot. We just don't all admit it. Of course, it's easier for an atheist to admit that he may be wrong - there's no fear of DIVINE RETRIBUTION. So perhaps we can forgive the rest for their dogmatism.

...Nah - let's not!!

[falling*moon]

those who live like animals..

JUST eat....drink.....play....

eat....drink.....play....


and sin for ever ...ignoring Hell..!

[RobinHood3000]

...and by far the commonest - lol

We all doubt. Such is Humanity's lot. We just don't all admit it. Of course, it's easier for an atheist to admit that he may be wrong - there's no fear of DIVINE RETRIBUTION. So perhaps we can forgive the rest for their dogmatism.

...Nah - let's not!!
What do you mean, "no fear of divine retribution?" If we're wrong, divine retribution is exactly what we end up with.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

If you don't believe in a divine being, then how can you be subject to divine retribution? Religion extends no farther than one's mind, and to call something a "religious truth" is merely to find a group with a similar theological belief who concur with each other. Athiests rely on the nonexistence of belief, and collectively they then believe a divine being doesn't exist. Can you have punishment without a punisher?

[Hazel-Ra]

I am an athiest depending on how you choose to define the term. I do not believe in a religious being. I do, however, believe in something. My dad, however, is a classic athiest.

[emily655321]

If you don't believe in a divine being, then how can you be subject to divine retribution? Religion extends no farther than one's mind, and to call something a "religious truth" is merely to find a group with a similar theological belief who concur with each other.Well, that's what atheists believe. That's why they're atheists; no point in behaving as if there's a God if you think it's all in your head, is there? People who do believe in God honestly think there is someone there to punish them. And, if they're right, and atheists are actually mistaken, then the souls of athiests may or may not be in real trouble when they die (depending on what sort of guy God happens to be).

[Xamonas Chegwe]

What do you mean, "no fear of divine retribution?" If we're wrong, divine retribution is exactly what we end up with.

...and that risk is as great through choosing the wrong religion as from choosing none! In fact, any catholic will tell you that all other 'so-called' christians are damned because 'theirs' is the only 'true' faith. You can't follow every religion (and I have yet to come across any that is more convincing than any other) so I prefer to follow none.

In my opinion (and lacking any concrete evidence from a certifiably divine being, that's all we have to go on, a bunch of opinions) there is no reason to believe in anything that we cannot experience with our senses, or which we can deduce from those experiences.

Any deity that seriously wanted us to believe without question would (given his/her/its absolute infallability) provide incontrivertible proof to base that belief on (unless he/she/it is just toying with us, in which case they are guilty of a sick joke and not worthy of praise).

Instead, all we have are a selection of ambiguous, self-contradictory texts, all obviously penned by far less sophisticated and wordly-wise people than ourselves. I expect that when I die, I die. I have no soul, only a brain, and I will use it to analyse everything for as long as I am able, the existence of god included.

If I'm wrong, I will argue the toss with whatever deity I find in the 'next world'. And I will be wanting some pretty good explanations!

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Something to add to this as well....it doesn't take a religious person to be a moral person. Do we need a god to tell us we shouldn't kill people, or can we be civil and understand that doing so is not in the best interests of everyone involved? Of course, morality is also just in someone's head...look at all the murderers who have thought that killing was the "right thing to do".

Regarding religion, I equate it to a bottomless cup. Why? A bottomless cup is still empty after you have put everything you have into it. A bottomless cup leaves you with what you started with when you are done with it...nothing. Both of these things I have found true of religion. How many times have people asked theological questions only to be given more questions just because religion cannot be "proven" ? Why can't we prove religion existent? Is it because some god doesn't want us figuring it out, or because we're supposed to be on some "quest for the truth"? If I'm going to go on a quest, I want an end and some sort of tangible answer. "Feeling" the call of a certain god is nothing more than someone convincing themselves that their god is real, and the reason people say they feel peace in doing so isnt because they've been invaded with all-pervasive grace....it's because they've decided to stop rationalizing. Religion is just an intellectual drug that uses the unknown to addict people. Just my thoughts.

[RobinHood3000]

...I'm guessing XxDarkClarityxX is an atheist, as well.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

It's a result of Catholicism being shoved down my throat as an augmentation to my education...I wasn't always an athiest, but I've turned out to be that way. Too much of a good thing, or should I say SOMETHING, will cause a reversal of the desired effect.

[Ancestor]

It has been a while since I posted on this thread but XXdarkclarityXX made a good point about you do not have to be a person of faith to be a moral one. I am a person of faith but I know many people whom are atheist that are more moral then a person who believes in the Bible. It a matter of how you choose to life your life and that it is okay to believe or not to believe.

[RobinHood3000]

It's a result of Catholicism being shoved down my throat as an augmentation to my education...I wasn't always an athiest, but I've turned out to be that way. Too much of a good thing, or should I say SOMETHING, will cause a reversal of the desired effect.
Ah, yes, I'm familiar with the phenomenon. If you look elsewhere on these forums, I think that you can find my post on a hardcore Christian who pretty much poured cement over my feet on the "Atheist" side of the line.

[emily655321]

In fact, any catholic will tell you that all other 'so-called' christians are damned because 'theirs' is the only 'true' faith.Sorry, Xamonas, don't mean to nit-pick, but I always feel compelled to defend the religious against such blanket statements, citing my own experience with religion. I was raised in an, admittedly, very liberal Catholic church, but was always taught that any Christian, be they Catholic or Protestant, was accepted by God as his own. Now, I always took issue with the "you have to be Christian" aspect of that (I recall asking my mother when I was little, "What about all the good people who aren't Christian? What about all the people who live in the Amazon and will never hear about Jesus, but are still good people? Do you mean they don't go to Heaven? Is God really that unfair?" ...and then I aged a few years and decided it was all total BS), but my point is that there are plenty of Christians, and specifically Catholics, who do not believe Christian denomination makes a difference to the fate of one's soul.

That's all. :D

[beowulflee]

This thread is so stupid. Atheist is defined on a negative, meaning that it tells you what the person does not believe in. It does not tell you what the person believes in. The end, /gg.

[RobinHood3000]

This thread is so stupid. Atheist is defined on a negative, meaning that it tells you what the person does not believe in. It does not tell you what the person believes in. The end, /gg.
Perhaps I can put things into perspective for you.

Could you answer briefly what theists believe in? Without leaving anyone out?

[Virgil]

Sorry, Xamonas, don't mean to nit-pick, but ... Catholics, who do not believe Christian denomination makes a difference to the fate of one's soul.

That's all. :D
Emily's right. Catholic doctrine does not restrict Protestants (I'm not sure about non-Christians; I would have to look it up) from going to heaven. Some of these are folklore, rather than doctrine. For instance, there is nothing in Christian doctrine that says if an infant is not babptized and it dies, it goes to hell or limbo. But everyone thinks that.

This is an interesting thread. As someone who has gone from both sides of this at sometime in my life, I hear recurring themes.

[kashifalikamil]

hmmmmmmmmmmm

[Xamonas Chegwe]

Emily,

I apologise for using the words 'any catholic' in my statement. It should of course be replaced by 'most catholics'. My error.

Beowulflee,

This point has been covered many times but bears repeating. Atheists believe that there is no god. We do not merely not believe, but actively believe in the absence of a creator from the universe.

Would you consider it 'negative' to believe there is no Santa? Or no Yeti?

Do you consider all negative words equally stupid? Uninformed, for instance? A stupid word; by your definition, it tells you what you aren't but not what you are, in exactly the same way as atheist. Imprecise? Immature? More stupid and meaningless words according to your theory.

To me, not only are they not 'stupid', but instead they serve as a very accurate description of your last post.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

This thread is so stupid. Atheist is defined on a negative, meaning that it tells you what the person does not believe in. It does not tell you what the person believes in. The end, /gg.

stupid-

adj 1: lacking or marked by lack of intellectual acuity

You use a device which you yourself rebuke. Also, by telling someone what you don't believe in, aren't you telling them what you DO believe in? Not saying no means saying yes, and not saying yes means no. We're forced to make choices in life, most of which are binomial in nature: you have to pick this or that. You don't pick this, you get that. You don't pick that, you get this. You can state your beliefs or you can't, but either way you're making a stance. Good day.

[emily655321]

Not saying no means saying yes, and not saying yes means no.I'm afraid the world isn't that simple, hon. You can get yourself in sticky situations thinking that way about some things. People, for instance. Especially in matters of religion and other things metaphysical, the world is one big grey area.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Emily,

What I was talking about when I said that was relative to decisions because they CAN'T be gray...at least the outcome. The reasoning can be gray, along with the situation and circumstances surrounding the decision, but in the end you have to make a choice. That's what I think is black or white.

For example, imagine you are standing in the middle of two train tracks and there is a train on the right track. You have your husband on the right side of the track and your son on the left side of the track, both of whom are tied down and have no way of getting loose. You also have the train lever, which can make the train go on the left track. If you don't act, your husband dies because the direction of the train doesn't change. If you do act, you save your husband. Is the decision bogged down by very gray circumstances and thoughts? Can you immediately make such a difficult choice? No, you can't, and that part is gray. BUT.....eventually, you've got to do something. By not acting, you save your son. By acting, you save your husband. You've got to make a choice either way, and each choice has definitive consequences. That's what I meant by what I said, and I hope I have clarified my thoughts for you.

[emily655321]

Your thoughts are clear, XXdarkclarityXX, I'm just taking issue with the idea that all situations are black and white. There are, such as in the rather outlandish and unrelated example you use, situations which have only two choices. I'm saying that I disagree with applying such logic to matters of religion. Your logic—in saying that "not saying no means yes, and not saying yes means no"—runs with the "you're either with us or you're against us" idea, which I've always disliked. In that specific instance, in the difference between saying "yes" and "no," there are vast amounts of grey area. In short, "not saying yes" does not mean saying "no," it means exactly what it says: not saying one thing or the other. It could possibly mean saying "maybe," it could possibly mean saying "I don't know," or it could possibly mean that one does indeed have an opinion one way or another, but chooses to stay publicly non-committal. Those are not "grey areas" leading up to a black and white statement, they are statements in themselves; that's the sort of grey area I mean.

I don't mean to attack you on semantics, but it seems to me an important distinction to make. I understand your point, I'm just disagreeing with it. :)

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Emily,

Semantics are a viable target within my argument...no harm done. I think what might be good is if others discuss what they think, because between us we've exposed two huge schools of thought regarding decision making and it might be good to see what others believe.

[falling*moon]

Yo guyz..

Am here on this earth for a reason .. I should have a belief in something ..my job is to reach the TRUE instead of doubting the whole thing right?

Loki …and the others.. lets speak rationally ..

Even without the Holy books… do u think that God is there just to answer YOUR prayers ???
Sorry this is not logic..
And sorry if someone treated u so bad in your childhood and made u blame the sky..
And sorry if u wanted just to be a copy of some famous “screwed up writers” who failed to reach the truth and bluffed a lot..!
But God created us to worship him not to jump on trees and eat like……..!!
Look around u and count the blessings if u could… rivers….food…family……….. beautiful sky…roses….health….air…everything

No..look inside you…you have a beating heart…eyes to see…a mind to think..
Do you think that God made you just to answer ur prayers?????
Do you think you are here just to be here and get ill ..or die ????

Am really Sorry..but this is Mega Stupid ...and am praying for YO all to be reasonable..



PS :

SIR honey I agree with ur wisdom here “the problem with the dogmatic believers is that they never think that their dogma/doctrine might be questionable ... one doesn't need a very high iq to understand that the hundreds of Christian dogmas have tremendous gaps because they are MADE BY PEOPLE with more or less genius, with slight or serious psychological problems and with heaps of religious fanaticism.”

But I hope you look more in something else instead of neglecting all..!

[falling*moon]

“even though i am more scared of the people with a firm belief...the inquisitors were 100% sure they were right and those who didn't believe in their god deserved to dye, the Muslim kamikazes are 100% sure they are right and if u don't believe what they believe they have the right to kill u.
a man who doubts would never kill or give his life on behalf of an idea .”



you say Firm belief ??

Most Muslims have firm believes I think and they don’t kill others…

but those stupid kamikazes believe if they kill – what they call- nonbelievers they will go to Paradise alone and God will love them alone ..On the other hand, Some of them think of it as a revenge to these stupid un necessary Wars the US leading upon the world.

Muslim kamikazes will rest in deep HELL, if you want my opinion ,for killing the innocent people everywhere, By the way, one Muslim priest wrote in a message dedicated to the world that Islam is not about killing at all …….. and that they are not forcing the beliefs on those who don’t believe .. those so-called “Muslim” FREAKS are killing their OWN people ..i think they are either crazy or just a depressed gang of Losers in their countries.. that’s all..


“I said life after death is nothingness”

Dear Dyrwen.. I believe we will be punished for our committed sins,, and prized for our good deeds.. what would encourage me to do good deeds in this life if I knew am not paid back in the afterlife ..!!

In other words :

How can I encourage my son to succeed in the Final Exam if I don’t promise him a reward ..or at least a threat in case he fails..???

answer that ..

Do not say he will feel good by succeeding ..i can kill somebody and feel as good as a winner of the Super Ball !!


thanx

[falling*moon]

something else,
Dear MiSaNthrOpE ,

“Take Adam and Eve, for example. Adam and Eve eat from the Tree of Knowledge and God punishes them. First, God must have planted the Tree in the first place, and second, what does that say about Him except that he wants his followers to be ignorant”

Yah, you maybe right in that but
…I’ve read another version about Adam and Eve in an English copy of the Quran ..

God asked Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree… Lucifer seduced them claiming that God doesn’t want them to be knowledgeable -which was a lie- .. so they ate and disobeyed God’s order ..that’s why they were punished.. for their disobedience ..

As for “Atheists do good things purely because they want to and find satisfaction in it”
Again…I disagree … coz Again I can do a bad thing and Find satisfaction too !!!!
God encouraged us to do good deeds and promised us Paradise..


“Maybe this sounds rough, but have I not said time and again that the best sermon you preach is how you live and act, and the way you treat others? Attitude counts for a lot. As in sales, presentation counts for a lot. Sharing and caring means more than trying to force things down people's throats.”

Bliss ya 4 that

thank u all and sorry

[RobinHood3000]

How can I encourage my son to succeed in the Final Exam if I don’t promise him a reward ..or at least a threat in case he fails..???

answer that ..
Because it is beneficial to his eventual well-being. Those exact words might not be the most effective, but that's the general idea. The concept of delayed gratification is a critical one. Plus, as any sitcom writer or ironic playwright knows, it is the flow of information that defines interaction. Some of the most awkward, uncomfortable, or downright terrible situations on earth, fictional or otherwise, stem from lack of information.

Okay, I digressed there significantly, but I think the reason why one should do well in their Final Exams is the same reason why "stupid" is considered an insult. We live in the Information Age--the more you know, the easier things get.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

falling moon,

Have you ever tried to write a coherent, gramatically correct essay? Are you aware that most rhetorical arguments lose substantial credibility when they are not correctly formulated?

Secondly, you are under an unproven assumption that there IS something to doubt. How do you know that "God" wants us to worship him? Prove to me there's something to worship and then I'll start worshiping something. "God", falling moon, is jut a set of ideals. Goodness, charity, honor, selflessness.....those are all qualities displayed by stories which depict this "God". But what we are meant to follow are these ideals themselves, and we shouldn't believe that there's a person who actually hears everyone's prayers and brings people back to life. The scripture stories all show that following these IDEALS will allow you to be rewarded in the form of other people thinking well of you. Prayer is just a confidence booster, there's no one listening to that prayer except yourself. It boosts your confidence and gives you hope because by speaking to an imaginary friend (the equivilant to God) you've complained to someone else. Then, when something good happens, you can praise "God" for answering your incessant complaints. When something bad happens, all of a sudden you've created a scapegoat. Did you do badly on a test that you had prayed about the night before? Don't blame God, and don't say it's his will! It's yours! You shape your choices. Why would you believe in something that states that you don't have total control over your life?

I apologize for the certain level of rambling, wherever apparent within the above text. Thank you and I welcome responses.

Edited by Logos to remove flames

[Virgil]

Emily's right. Catholic doctrine does not restrict Protestants (I'm not sure about non-Christians; I would have to look it up) from going to heaven. Some of these are folklore, rather than doctrine. For instance, there is nothing in Christian doctrine that says if an infant is not babptized and it dies, it goes to hell or limbo. But everyone thinks that.

This is an interesting thread. As someone who has gone from both sides of this at sometime in my life, I hear recurring themes.
Just to be clear on Catholic doctrine of non-Catholics and going to heaven, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is the official position of teaching by the Roman Catholic church, states the following:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience--those too may achieve eternal salvation. (Paragraph 847)
So, you do not have to be Roman Catholic or even Christian under Roman Catholic teaching to get into heaven. What the criteria is, as I read it, is to do God's will, which I believe to mean, love thy neighbor and love God. Not too dificult, even if you don't know about Christianity.

[RobinHood3000]

I'm guessing, though, those of us that do know about Christianity but deny it will be playing flexibility-based party games for the rest of eternity?

Everybody, LIMBO!!

[Logos]

XXdarkclarityXX, there are many people here who do not use English as their first language so please do not flame others for their spelling and/or grammatical errors.

You can still take someone seriously and be respectful of their opinion/belief without resorting to ad hominem.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Logos,

Yes, my attempt in debasing falling moon's argument did employ ad hominem tactics. However, the inability to use English effectively begs the question: Why use it to make an argument if you're not proficient with it? I have no problem with English being a second langauge, but if you do not have the proper command of it to use it effectively then I do have a problem with its use for rhetorical purposes. Imagine you are a writer and a painter, but you are much better at painting then in writing. Would it make any sense for you to write rather than paint? No, because you are much better at painting. The same goes for communicating thoughts and ideas through language: the more effective tactic should be used to convey the message. In this case, it would be the first language. Now, since this forum requires posts to be in English, it might be more beneficial to those who cannot sufficiently utilize English to find a place where they may successfully and freely state their thoughts in their native language.

Am I elitist? No. Am I anti-immigration? No. Then what am I? I'm utilitarian, and someone who cannot make an argument with correct structure, word usage, spelling, and grammar is wasting the time of the other members here by obstructing the meaning of what they have written with blaringly obvious literary deficiencies. Logos, while I apologize for any disrespect which may have been communicated between my sentiments and any other member of this forum, I stand by my position. If you cannot or do not formulate a coherent argument, flaming is warranted due to the simple fact that it wastes time and exhibits profound laziness. If you don't know English, learn before posting. If you don't feel like learning or don't learn enough, then don't post. On that note I say good night.

[Logos]

Look, if you choose to enter into discussion or debate here please try to be respectful of other people in how you say things.

There are a lot of people here learning English, they use these very forums as practice. There may be some here with vision impairment, who use voice recognition software in order to communicate and the text isn't always perfect. There are myriad other reasons why someone might not post to your satisfaction but we can't all be happy with or like what others say, but you can still be "nice" in how you say it.

[rachel]

Just to be clear on Catholic doctrine of non-Catholics and going to heaven, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is the official position of teaching by the Roman Catholic church, states the following:
(Paragraph 847)
So, you do not have to be Roman Catholic or even Christian under Roman Catholic teaching to get into heaven. What the criteria is, as I read it, is to do God's will, which I believe to mean, love thy neighbor and love God. Not too dificult, even if you don't know about Christianity.

Having converted to Catholicism so that I am a Messianic Jew I know that Virgil says about the Catechism is true, I have read it. There is a scripture that says very plainly which Peter the first vicar of the Church after the resurrection of Christ Jesus said following a council: "For I perceive that God is not partial, but the man from every nation that does the will of God is acceptable to Him."
There is another scripture that says" the whole obligation of man is to get to know God."

[RobinHood3000]

Yes, my attempt in debasing falling moon's argument did employ ad hominem tactics. However, the inability to use English effectively begs the question: Why use it to make an argument if you're not proficient with it? I have no problem with English being a second langauge, but if you do not have the proper command of it to use it effectively then I do have a problem with its use for rhetorical purposes. Imagine you are a writer and a painter, but you are much better at painting then in writing. Would it make any sense for you to write rather than paint? No, because you are much better at painting. The same goes for communicating thoughts and ideas through language: the more effective tactic should be used to convey the message. In this case, it would be the first language. Now, since this forum requires posts to be in English, it might be more beneficial to those who cannot sufficiently utilize English to find a place where they may successfully and freely state their thoughts in their native language.

Am I elitist? No. Am I anti-immigration? No. Then what am I? I'm utilitarian, and someone who cannot make an argument with correct structure, word usage, spelling, and grammar is wasting the time of the other members here by obstructing the meaning of what they have written with blaringly obvious literary deficiencies. Logos, while I apologize for any disrespect which may have been communicated between my sentiments and any other member of this forum, I stand by my position. If you cannot or do not formulate a coherent argument, flaming is warranted due to the simple fact that it wastes time and exhibits profound laziness. If you don't know English, learn before posting. If you don't feel like learning or don't learn enough, then don't post. On that note I say good night.
¿Cómo tú sientes si una persona te diga que tú no puedes dar tu opinion?

How would you feel if someone told you that you couldn't express your opinion? If someone said that, no matter how you felt on the subject, you couldn't tell people how you felt, could not contribute to a conversation because your language skills were poor and because he did not feel like bothering to try and understand you? Just because someone doesn't speak as well as you do is no reason for you to disregard their input. Nightshade here is dyslexic--would you like her to leave, as well? Or waste her time correcting every little thing, as opposed to wasting yours when you have to take two extra seconds to think about her posts?

Back on the subject--yes, one could derive pleasure from doing something bad, but there's also the potential for guilt. Strength of conscience is the benchmark, the little meter on a person's forehead that tells what kind of person they are. And indeed, one of the most frightening things to see is two people arguing about religion, each one certain that their own view is correct.

[rachel]

You are absolutely right M'Lord. the scriptures command us to be peaceable with all, actually considering the other as superior.
As well we are commanded to love others as we love ourselves and we must love ourselves.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

¿Cómo tú sientes si una persona te diga que tú no puedes dar tu opinion?

How would you feel if someone told you that you couldn't express your opinion? If someone said that, no matter how you felt on the subject, you couldn't tell people how you felt, could not contribute to a conversation because your language skills were poor and because he did not feel like bothering to try and understand you? Just because someone doesn't speak as well as you do is no reason for you to disregard their input. Nightshade here is dyslexic--would you like her to leave, as well? Or waste her time correcting every little thing, as opposed to wasting yours when you have to take two extra seconds to think about her posts?

Back on the subject--yes, one could derive pleasure from doing something bad, but there's also the potential for guilt. Strength of conscience is the benchmark, the little meter on a person's forehead that tells what kind of person they are. And indeed, one of the most frightening things to see is two people arguing about religion, each one certain that their own view is correct.

I never said that people couldn't express their opinion, and nightshade's case in an exception to the group of individuals i am referring to. Honestly, if an individual's language skills are poor than it is up to them to improve them. Furthermore, it is not the responsibility of the reader to decipher another's writing if it is faulty. Rather, the individual being read should make an effort to bring their writing to a level that includes fundamental lucidity. In any case, there shouldn't be any misspelled words or grammatical mistakes. There are such things as dictionaries and spellcheck to aid in such an endeavor. If an individual is too lazy to bring themselves to an acceptable level of expression with the English language by learning it, they shouldn't post. Legitimate medical disabilities obviously do not fall under this category, as that is not a matter of lazyness.

All I'm saying is that those in this forum who have the capability (granted, there are a select few who don't because of circumstances within their life, such as in night shade's case) to learn english and use it effectively should. If they choose not to (it's a choice, ultimately) then they shouldn't post. Those who do not have English as their primary language would do well to learn English, as it is the primary tool of expression in this forum. Did I say immigrants couldn't come here and post? No, all I'm saying is that if they do desire to post they should do so after making sure they have a good handle on the English language. Until then, they could post on forums which use their native language and continue to expand their knowledge of English while doing so until they are ready to post here.

[Scheherazade]

I never said that people couldn't express their opinion, and Nightshade's case is an exception to the group of individuals I am referring to. Honestly, if an individual's language skills are poor then it is up to them to improve them. Furthermore, it is not the responsibility of the reader to decipher another's writing if it is faulty. Rather, the individual being read should make an effort to bring their writing to a level that includes fundamental lucidity. In any case, there shouldn't be any misspelled words or grammatical mistakes. There are such things as dictionaries and spellcheck to aid in such an endeavor. If an individual is too lazy to bring themselves to an acceptable level of expression with the English language by learning it, they shouldn't post. Legitimate medical disabilities obviously do not fall under this category, as that is not a matter of laziness.

All I'm saying is that those in this forum who have the capability (granted, there are a select few who don't because of circumstances within their lives, such as in Nightshade's case) to learn English and use it effectively should. If they choose not to (it's a choice, ultimately) then they shouldn't post. Those who do not have English as their primary language would do well to learn English, as it is the primary tool of expression in this forum. Did I say immigrants couldn't come here and post? No, all I'm saying is that if they do desire to post they should do so after making sure they have a good handle on the English language. Until then, they could post on forums which use their native language and continue to expand their knowledge of English while doing so until they are ready to post here.XXdarkclarityXX,

This Forum is open to people from all walks of life; it is visited by people from all over the world; they come from different social, economical, religious, cultural backgrounds and it is this very diversity that makes it the wonderful place that it is.

It is true that the communication medium is English but we don't discourage people who are in the process of learning English from posting. It is an opportunity for them to practise, which can be something hard to come by if you are living in a foreign country.

What's more, there are many native English speakers who have trouble with spelling/grammar rules. If you find yourself really unable to deal with such superficial issues, please feel free to ignore such posts/users and read the ones which fulfill your criteria of good English.

PS: I hope you will forgive me that I have taken the liberty of correcting some spelling mistakes you made... I could not venture on the punctutation and context as I am short of time.


Now, please let's stay on topic and carry on with the topic of discussion, atheism!

[water lily]

falling moon,

Have you ever tried to write a coherent, gramatically correct essay? Are you aware that most rhetorical arguments lose substantial credibility when they are not correctly formulated?

Secondly, you are under an unproven assumption that there IS something to doubt. How do you know that "God" wants us to worship him? Prove to me there's something to worship and then I'll start worshiping something. "God", falling moon, is jut a set of ideals. Goodness, charity, honor, selflessness.....those are all qualities displayed by stories which depict this "God". But what we are meant to follow are these ideals themselves, and we shouldn't believe that there's a person who actually hears everyone's prayers and brings people back to life. The scripture stories all show that following these IDEALS will allow you to be rewarded in the form of other people thinking well of you. Prayer is just a confidence booster, there's no one listening to that prayer except yourself. It boosts your confidence and gives you hope because by speaking to an imaginary friend (the equivilant to God) you've complained to someone else. Then, when something good happens, you can praise "God" for answering your incessant complaints. When something bad happens, all of a sudden you've created a scapegoat. Did you do badly on a test that you had prayed about the night before? Don't blame God, and don't say it's his will! It's yours! You shape your choices. Why would you believe in something that states that you don't have total control over your life?

I apologize for the certain level of rambling, wherever apparent within the above text. Thank you and I welcome responses.

Edited by Logos to remove flames

xxdarkclarityxx,
Evidently your first two sentences proved to be more sensational than the majority of your post, and I'm not sure that you were as welcominig to the responses given than you intended. heh. But being me, I would like to refocus the conversation on the whole religion/atheist issue.

Firstly, you ask, "Why would you believe in something that states that you don't have total control over your life?" Well, my friend, we don't have total control over our lives. We are subject to chance, disease, disaster, and all manner of "random" misfortunes. And the belief that someone does have control over our lives, over such phenomena, the belief that there's a force in the universe other than cold chance and coincidence can be reassuring.

Secondly, you're whole prayer hypothesis is intriguing, though at times, a little harsh, even vindictive (I suppose Catholicism really must have been shoved quite forcibly down your throat). But I do not mean to dsicredit your thoughts, but rather to build on them. If I am to understand you correctly, prayer and religion is in fact an adaptive behaviour: it reduces stress, it soothes, it offers protection (or for you atheists, a false sense of protection). And, in fact, I do believe that I've come across the stat that those who are religious generally have a slightly longer liife expectancy than those who are not. So perhaps the whole concept of religion was selected as adaptive behaviour vea evolution (which admittedly is very ironic). So my dear atheists, rather than argue with believers, why not congratulate them on practisinig so adaptive a behaviour?

Anyways, those are some thoughts, consequently I disagree with my entire second paragaph, but I hope it will evoke some initeresting discussion.

-Water lily :nod:

[Nightshade]

Welll :eek: I saw my name. Dont know why I came in here today as I usually avoide these places however now that Im here I might as well join in :D


And indeed, one of the most frightening things to see is two people arguing about religion, each one certain that their own view is correct
Actually thats not the scariest thing Robin, the scariest is without doubt when you can it there and tottally belive one side of the argument and yet see that the other side is right too. Now I havent gone back and read this thread totallly yet, I havent really the time just now so sorry if its been said orif this is way off topic but , personally I think many of the "big/book" religons are the same but not.
I mean if you look at the details and ignore the big enoroums things that seperate thm its thge same thing. sort of like if you had 4 pictures and you chopped 3 of them up then stuck them back together differantly, they'd all be the same picture in detail/ or close up but each one is differant too.

:D

[RobinHood3000]

xxdarkclarityxx,
Evidently your first two sentences proved to be more sensational than the majority of your post, and I'm not sure that you were as welcominig to the responses given than you intended. heh. But being me, I would like to refocus the conversation on the whole religion/atheist issue.

Firstly, you ask, "Why would you believe in something that states that you don't have total control over your life?" Well, my friend, we don't have total control over our lives. We are subject to chance, disease, disaster, and all manner of "random" misfortunes. And the belief that someone does have control over our lives, over such phenomena, the belief that there's a force in the universe other than cold chance and coincidence can be reassuring.

Secondly, you're whole prayer hypothesis is intriguing, though at times, a little harsh, even vindictive (I suppose Catholicism really must have been shoved quite forcibly down your throat). But I do not mean to dsicredit your thoughts, but rather to build on them. If I am to understand you correctly, prayer and religion is in fact an adaptive behaviour: it reduces stress, it soothes, it offers protection (or for you atheists, a false sense of protection). And, in fact, I do believe that I've come across the stat that those who are religious generally have a slightly longer liife expectancy than those who are not. So perhaps the whole concept of religion was selected as adaptive behaviour vea evolution (which admittedly is very ironic). So my dear atheists, rather than argue with believers, why not congratulate them on practisinig so adaptive a behaviour?

Anyways, those are some thoughts, consequently I disagree with my entire second paragaph, but I hope it will evoke some initeresting discussion.

-Water lily :nod:
There's a critical difference there that you should note--evolution is genetic. Religion (or lack thereof) is not.

Besides, some of us atheists do indeed support the religious in their endeavours.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Besides, some of us atheists do indeed support the religious in their endeavours.

Robin, you can't be playing both sides against the middle here. You are either in favor of atheism, or you support some sort of religion. Why support "the religious in their endeavors" when you don't support the ideals which they stand for? That's like saying "I support the troops in Iraq but not the war", which is total BS because the troops are part of the war. In any case, I think I need to make a critical distinction myself: The people that are part of a group support that group's ideals. The endeavors are religious and are based on ideals which the religious people follow. Athiests don't support religion in any form, which means we shouldn't be supporting them or their actions.

[Virgil]

What's wrong with someone supporting religous people but not finding it in himself to believe? Radical atheists are just as obnoxious as radical believers. Perhaps more so, since why should they care what other people believe?

[RobinHood3000]

To XXdarkclarityXX:

It appears that you are unaware of the wide variety of atheistic philosophies available. ANALOGY POLICE! I think it's more like saying, "I support the troops in Iraq, but I don't necessarily agree with the ideals of every soldier--only the overall cause for which they fight."

I happen to think that religion can be an overall positive influence on the lives of the majority of people IN GENERAL. I simply don't feel that a theistic religion is right FOR ME. Just as trying to qualify oneself as 100% is one mistake, another is thinking that the same religion or philosophy is right for everyone.

[water lily]

in response to robin's comment:


There's a critical difference there that you should note--evolution is genetic. Religion (or lack thereof) is not.

Have you heard of cultural evolution? it works in a similar way, you pass on your ideals, your way of life to the younger generation if you live long enough and if it is a successful behaviour. And furthermore how does one know if religion is not genetic--not religion exactly--but the capacity for spiritual thought, a cognitive thing.

-water lily

[XXdarkclarityXX]

To XXdarkclarityXX:

It appears that you are unaware of the wide variety of atheistic philosophies available. ANALOGY POLICE! I think it's more like saying, "I support the troops in Iraq, but I don't necessarily agree with the ideals of every soldier--only the overall cause for which they fight."

I happen to think that religion can be an overall positive influence on the lives of the majority of people IN GENERAL. I simply don't feel that a theistic religion is right FOR ME. Just as trying to qualify oneself as 100% is one mistake, another is thinking that the same religion or philosophy is right for everyone.

Would you mind citing these different atheistic philosophies of which you speak? Atheism, by definition, is simply the rejection of religion. How can one make variety with that? In response to your "analogy correction", what do you mean by "not necessarily agreeing with the ideals of every soldier?" The soldier is the war, and the war is the soldier. We are not talking on an individual level here because a community is about the community, not the individual. If a religious person practices religion and believes in a god, it really doesn't matter why they are doing it. The fact is they are and because they are, what they stand for is contrary to atheistic thought. This can only mean that they themselves are against atheism. So, why support that?

I had no intention of stating that one religion was right for everyone, but I will state that once an individual is a declared member of a religious group he/she loses his or her individuality. If they feel the need to regain such individuality by disconnecting to certain doctrines of the said group, then they need to leave. Want a good example? Cafeteria Catholics- they pick and choose what they feel like believing. If you can't accept parts of a religion, why bother being a part of it? On another note, why do you think the Catholic Church is blamed for priest misconduct more than the individual priest? The priest is a symbol of Catholicism, and when a priest screws up the Catholic Church screws up. When you communicate your desire to support religion, you communicate the tendency for atheists to do the same and that is against the identity of our community. If you wish to go against atheistic beliefs, simply do not be atheist. If you are atheist then you do not support religion. If you do support religion, then you should not identify yourself as an atheist.

[RobinHood3000]

Rather militant, aren't we?

Noooo, atheism is the lack of a deity in one's religion. For example, Confucianism, Daoism, and some forms of Buddhism are all example of atheistic religions.

No, the soldier is NOT the war. Soldiers are not defined as people by war--it is what they do, not what they are.

I strongly disagree with your "if they're not with us, they're against us" philosophy. To put it in geek terms, "Only a Sith deals in absolutes." Your argument is more or less based around the contention that if you agree with religion, you're anti-atheist, and if you're atheist, you're not allowed to like religious people. Kinda makes for a lonely lifestyle, doesn't it? I happen to know plenty of religious people who are more than compassionate towards atheists (as a matter of fact, I'm dating one), and even to those who are less than understanding, I try to be at least civil to them.

Do you know what "tolerance" means? This is not a war being the theists and atheists--if anything, atheists and theists should pursue understanding of each other's point of view. Attacking the religious isn't going to improve their opinions or acceptance of atheists.

Now I'm going to segue into something a little firmer--nothing personal, it's just that the statement makes a better point if said angrily: How DARE you question my loyalty as an atheist!! Being an atheist doesn't mean I don't support religion, it means I don't believe in it as a philosophy. That being said, I still believe in it as a concept. Religion improves the overall quality of life of most people who seek it--how is that a bad thing?

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Robin,

We obviously have conflicting views regarding this topic. For the sake of productivity within this particular thread, I request that you send any remaining sentiments via PM to me. I personally have voiced my opinion sufficiently and have no desire to discuss this topic further. However, should you feel the need to "send in the cavalry" in this little skirmish that has been created between us, I more than welcome any sort of response that you may have. I just don't think it's appropriate to have an elongated pissing contest in public.

[RobinHood3000]

Mmm, actually, that last one pretty much summed it up fer me. Truce?

Could have been worse--at least this particular entanglement was semi-related to the subject matter.

Uh, what were we talking about in this thread before we started arguing?

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Now, I'm NOT an atheist, but I've always wondered what exactly an atheist thinks or believes (now there's a contradiction if you've ever seen one! :lol: athesist and believe might as well see if you have a believer who disbelieves. :lol: )

Now what exactly does an atheist believe?? What is the definition you would give to describe an atheist?

I don't know if this is going to a popular thread or not, but I'll give it a try... ;)

I suppose this should serve as an adequate refresher for the intended purpose of the thread. And yes, a truce would be favorable.

[emily655321]

Actually, I think that particular bout of extended bickering served well to answer the first post of the thread. "What do atheists believe?" Well, as we've just seen, some atheists believe that to be an atheist they can have no respect for religion, and that one's beliefs are synonymous with who they are as a person (interestingly enough, this dualism vs. monism argument is also being waged in the Evolution V. Creationism thread); while some others believe that atheism is just that: purely a personal lack of belief, which still allows for them to hold respect for those who believe differently. I think it was an excellently encapsulated example (how's that for assonance?) of the variances within the subscribers of a particular philosophy. I think it also goes a long way to support the argument that atheism does not represent a complete belief system; the non-belief in a god clearly leaves room for many varying viewpoints in other areas of philosophy, namely with regard to other human beings.

[Xamonas Chegwe]

Emily,

I think you'll find that was alliteration and not assonance. Assonance is repetition of vowel sounds such as, "He was bloated and gloated that he floated, we voted!" whereas alliteration is the repetition of an initial letter.

Petty point precisely put, pardon my pedantry.

And back to the subject; atheism is a belief in the non-existence of any god. It is not inconsistent with believing in some of the ideals of those that believe the opposite. Personally, I applaud the work that christians do in providing relief in famine-struck countries, but not their efforts in handing out bibles to all and sundry. This is neither hypocrisy nor inconsistent with atheistic belief. Good works are good works whether done in the name of religion or humanitarianism.

[RobinHood3000]

Actually, it IS assonance (short "e" sounds abound). In addition, alliteration only applies to consonant sounds. And I couldn't agree more--so long as good deeds are done, do we dare declare the doers dunces?

[rachel]

M'LOrd,
is there in fact anything you don't know about , I mean anything at all?
No wonder you are the one and only ruler of Sherwood forest-even the trees bow to you.

[Virgil]

I thought for sure Xamonas was correct, but upon looking it up, but I'm not sure if either is correct. From Patterns of Poetry: An Encylopedia of Forms by Miller Williams.



Rhyme is the relationship between words with different consonants immediately proceding the final unaccented vowels and identical sounds thereafter (pillow/willow, go/know, undoing/construing). Assonance is the relationship between words with different consonants immediately preceeding and following the last accented vowels, which vowels have identical sounds (hit/will, disturb/bird, absolute/unglued). Consonance is the relationship between words whose final accented vowel sounds are different but with the same consonant frame (truck/trick, billion/bullion, impelling/compiling, trance/trounce). Alliteration is the relationship between words with identical consonants preceeding the first accented vowel and differing sounds on that vowel, on the subsequent consonant, if any, and possibly, but not necessarily, on all following sounds (slip/slide, glowing/glare).

Alliteration is strickly consonants, so in that respect, Robin is correct. This surprised me, because like Xamonas I thought words starting with vowels were alliteration too. But what Emily wrote was not assonance either, according to the definition. I'm going to have to explore this further.

[Xamonas Chegwe]

I shall coin a new 'Unofficial Word", Alliterassonance, to describe this phenomenon. ;)

Unless somebody knows of an official one that'll do the job...

[Virgil]

From A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms, second edition, by Richard A. Lanham.


Alliteration - Homoeoprophoron.
Originally, recurring of an initial consonant sound (and so a type of Consonance), but now sometimes used of vowel sounds as well (where it overlaps with Assonace)...Recurrence of both kinds of alliteration at once (ark, art, arm) yields what is sometimes called "front rhyme."

Assonance
Identity or similarity in sound between internal vowels in neighboring words.

So, Xamonas is correct. What Emily wrote, by contempory ussage is alliteration. It is definitely not assonance. Sorry Robin.

[RobinHood3000]

Eh, I went by Merriam-Webster's, there's no shame in that.

[Virgil]

I shall coin a new 'Unofficial Word", Alliterassonance, to describe this phenomenon. ;)

Unless somebody knows of an official one that'll do the job...
Hey, that's not a bad idea. I wonder how you submit that?

[Xamonas Chegwe]

...just don't get into the difference between one foot and another, that always does my brain in!

I'm happy to agree, as with religion and atheism, that there are different belief systems surrounding poetic terms. Right and wrong are far too absolute - although they definitely are alliterative!

[Xamonas Chegwe]

Hey, that's not a bad idea. I wonder how you submit that?

You post it on the Unofficial Words thread in General Literature of course!

[RobinHood3000]

Now here's a couple questions for the ages: which one is the LEFT sock? Which sandal is the "flip" and which is the "flop"? And what's the atomic weight of cobalt?

...okay, I just threw that last one in, just for kicks (it's about 58.933 amu), but the other ones are important!

[falling*moon]

Have you ever tried to write a coherent, gramatically correct essay? Are you aware that most rhetorical arguments lose substantial credibility when they are not correctly formulated?



No i've never tried to do so coz am not English ..so sue me or kill my tutor! :D

[XXdarkclarityXX]

If you don't know English, learn before posting. If you don't feel like learning or don't learn enough, then don't post.


No i've never tried to do so coz am not English ..so sue me or kill my tutor!

Do you really want me to start up on this again? I won't sue you and I won't kill your tutor, but what I will do is tell you to get your butt in gear. It really doesn't matter what nationality you are or what language you speak...you are using English, so use it correctly! Furthermore, you chose to come on this forum knowing full well that one of the requirements is using English. Did you think you could come in here and use it incorrectly? If that is indeed what you thought, do you then suppose people here are to take you seriously? You may (or may not) be a master of your native language but here (from what you've displayed) you are illiterate and I see no need for you to post here until you've developed enough linguistically to start forming coherent words and sentences. Lastly, stop using this place as target practice for your "shooting" of the English language. This place need not be butchered by people like you who post without knowing what you are doing. The humorous part of all this is that you expect tolerance and receive it in turn. Why should you expect (or receive for that matter)tolerance when you can't communicate in English with even minimal competence? Would you tolerate someone expressing their thoughts in your native language while consistently destroying any mention of correct syntax and diction? I think not, and to think that you should get away with that is hypocritical.

This, of course, is going to seem harsh and intolerant. To some extent, it is that way. But at least it's firm, unlike some of what I've seen here. I think some of the members here are confusing tolerance with leniency, both of which reside on either side of a very fine line. If we are to post in English, then let's do it in a correct manner or not at all. Good evening.

[RobinHood3000]

Why does it bother you so much if she is not as good with English as you are? Everyone has to learn some time, and posting here is how she can BECOME better. It is as if you are telling her to learn to read, and taking her books away until she does.

At any rate, we've been through this. Can we please get back to the subject at hand?

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Robin,

Why do you feel the need to be the "forum guardian"? Would it bother you so much to mind your own business? Do I have a problem with you? No. So why get involved? In any case, I apologize for the outburst and you may now continue to regularly scheduled programming.

P.S. This forum is for displaying finished products, not works in progress. All I'm telling her (and all the others who fall in her category) is to come here prepared to use English correctly. Learning English is elementary and has no place in a literary forum. BUT...I'll lay off. My point is established, I'm done here. Please, continue with atheistic debate.

[RobinHood3000]

Why do I feel the need to be the "forum guardian"? Take a look at my original avatar--that should clear things up. If I think someone is being unfairly persecuted, I'll say so. These forums certainly aren't for finished products--even the General Writing and Personal Poetry forums aren't for finished products. Mastering a language that isn't your own is far from elementary and is not an overnight process. It's a learning experience, and if people can't learn here, what's the point?

On the question of atheism, I'm curious: what is the dominant opinion of atheists nowadays? I'm interested in learning the religious point of view on us pagans.

[Logos]

BUT...I'll lay off. .. I'm done here.

Ok! thank you and good bye.

Anymore off-topic comments will be deleted.

Discuss the topic, not the poster.

[falling*moon]

[QUOTE=RobinHood3000]

Why do I feel the need to be the "forum guardian"? Take a look at my original avatar--that should clear things up. If I think someone is being unfairly persecuted, I'll say so. QUOTE]


Yes, that avator shows how fair and genteel you are .. Robin.. :thumbs_up

unlike others,..

anyway.. i think he hates me coz of what i said..not my language itself..even if he said so ..!


Robin, Logos and Scheherazade thank u very much

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Falling*Moon-

I never said I hated you. I said I hated your methods and the fact that they are tolerated on this forum. Well, hate is a bit of a strong word. I would use "irritated by".Yes, there's the proper term. If you don't know what those two words mean maybe you could ask our resident superhero, since he seems to have all the answers :rolleyes: .

Back to atheism, people. I'd like to point out that I did not ask for the most recent interjection by Falling*Moon and am merely defending myself.

[Nightshade]

OK Finally read all of it and I hav quite a few things to say and its going top be badly spelt so this is a prewarnng:D
OK working backwards falling moon ,

but those stupid kamikazes believe if they kill – what they call- nonbelievers they will go to Paradise alone and God will love them alone ..On the other hand, Some of them think of it as a revenge to these stupid unnecessary Wars the US leading upon the world.

right well Im not saying I belive this but to make it clearer if by kamikaze you mean the "groups" thats not quite what they belive what they belive is that bykilling and its not nonbelivers its an equivlent of idolaters, they will help spred the light of islam ( faulty logic but they are all brain washed) and should they die in the process they would have forfilled one of the ways of becoming a martyr (Others include dieing aslow agonising death like in a fire with belief strong in your heart) and thus secure a place in heaven forthemeselves and 70 of there family. he fact that this reasoning can only be backed up by cutting out and ignorting whople partsof the quarn and twisting all sorts of things is besides the point.
But what you said about Adam and Eve story interested me whats the christian version then, they werent punished becasue they disobeyed, but for somthing else? :confused:
mily you said somwhere about amazons and people who never heard of GOd going to Hell? I asked pretty much the same question and there was that person(sorry lost track of your name) said that he no longer belived in traditional Islam because people like mother teresa who are Gooddont go to heave? Well as far as Ive allways understood it all belivers (Muslims, chrstiens Jews and another group caled Hanify'een in arabic (followers of Abraham)) stand a very good chance at heavn and in fact no good deed goes unrewarded, basically people go to hell first and burn off the bad deeds even muslims but eventually they get to hevean.
Well that was long, but Im really intersted in Adam and Eve angle so anyone??

:D

[XXdarkclarityXX]

All atheists might find this link amusing: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/index.htm

It's called the Skeptic's Annotated Bible and it makes a lot of good points.

Happy reading! :cool:

[emily655321]

But what you said about Adam and Eve story interested me whats the christian version then, they werent punished becasue they disobeyed, but for somthing else? :confused:Night, I'm hesitant to answer because I'm not certain which bit about Adam and Eve you mean. What's the Q'uran's version of Adam and Eve? Then I can tell you if the Bible's version is any different. :)

[Nightshade]

the full version? OK then
God had the world the Angels (made of light no free will or ability to think for themselves) and the Djin( made of fire and have free will very like humans). Lucifer was Gods most bekloved creaion because he was the most devout of all creatures becaus he was the most devout of the djin and rivaled the angels in devotion though he had freedom of choice in how he behaved.
So one day God said to the angles " I will create on the Earth a follower" And the angels said " " Would you create onit one who would (polute/dirty/destroy ) and shed blood on it) when we are everlastingly praising and worshipping you, and He said I know what you do not" Anyway God creates Adam from dirt and taught him "all the names" gave him knowledge then displayed him to the angels and asked the angels to tell Him there( their ) names if they were so smart, and they replied We dont know anything but wha t you tell us and god had Adam tell them the names and said see I know what you do not and then had all of them bow to Adam. So they all did except Lucifer who's pride caused him to belive his fire to be superior than Adams dirt menaing that he shouldnt bow to an infereior being. SO his obediance lowered him in rank. Anyway God let Adam and eve wnder around Heaven as they willed but told them to keep away from this one tree to show theier obediance an love of God, anyway Satan Seduced and tricked them so they (all 3 of them) lost their place in Eden and " decended enimeys of each other " until the day of judgment.
Anyway Adam (and eve) prayed to be forgiven and was forgiven so God Sad they still all had to be punished but he would send many (reminders/lights/messages) to help people stay on the right path and not stray.


Interesingly there is a story (but Im not sure if its in the Qurarn it may only be a hadeeth) that Satan approached Moses (as the only human who ever spoke directly to God) askng him to interceed with God on his (satans Behalf ashe regreted what he'd done) But when it came to it satan didnt repent enoough to do what he was asked so is still Damned.

So emily or someone now wil tyou tell me the christian and while Im at it the Jewish version as well??

:D

[water lily]

Well I know the Christian version (and I far as I know this is the Jewish version as well). It follows the same general idea as the Islamic Creation story, but with some key differences:
1) Adam and Eve were on a paradise on Earth (the garden of Eden), rather than in heaven
2) Humans are beleived to be slighlty LOWER than the angels rather than higher
3) Thus Lucifer did not sin by refusing to bow down to man, as angels are seen to be above man, rather, he was jealous of God's powers, and led a rebellion against God with 1/3 of all the angels, thus the notion of a "fallen angel". This all happened before the creation of humans

Those are the main differences. The rest of the story is pretty basic. God gives them one commandement: Don't eat from the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Lucifer, in the form of a snake, tempts Eve to do so, she does and offers Adam some of the fruit. They are expelled from the garden and punished: Adam (males): will have to work to gain a living; Eve (females): will have pain in childbirth and be dominated by men; and their totally intimate connection with God was broken.

Hope this was helpful, Nightshade.

[Nightshade]

Thanks, interesting though In islam both are equally blamed lucifer convinced them rather than eve.
I love finding out little things :D

[water lily]

That is interesting. Though, I think important to note, that though Eve was the one Lucifer tempted, both Adam and Eve bit the fruit and so were equally at fault.

[jollyollie]

That is interesting. Though, I think important to note, that though Eve was the one Lucifer tempted, both Adam and Eve bit the fruit and so were equally at fault.
Atheists ROCK

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Atheists ROCK

Qualify thy statements, and thou will appear in a better light...

[Whifflingpin]

Maybe jollyollie was just trying to bring the thread back to its original topic

[XXdarkclarityXX]

That is entirely possible. I was merely pointing out the value of statements which are accompanied with qualifying explanations.

[emily655321]

Thanks, interesting though In islam both are equally blamed lucifer convinced them rather than eve.
I love finding out little things :DI'm fascinated to learn that Eve isn't singled out in the Q'uran. That one detail has been a big deal in the history of Christianity. In the Western world, the oppression of women has often been justified by the claim that original sin (the belief that all humans are born with sin, because of the sin of Adam and Eve) is mostly Eve's fault, because she tempted Adam just as Satan tempted her. I once heard an analogy that Eve's temptation symbolized/inspired womankind's ongoing temptation of men to do evil things. Medieval monks even taught that the female body was an instrument of the devil. We're just a horrible lot, aren't we? :p

Anyhoo... Water Lily is right on with the main points. Basically, the story starts with God making the Earth, and on each of the six days he makes a different part, and then on the seventh he rests. Adam is lonely, and so God puts him to sleep and removes one of his ribs, and from it he creates Eve. They are happy and ignorant of their nakedness. Then Satan appears in the form of a serpent, and convinces Eve to take the fruit by telling her, "God said to care for Adam, didn't he? Isn't it your duty as a wife to provide for your husband?" So she gives it to Adam, not telling him where she got it. Upon eating it, they notice their nakedness and are ashamed, and so they cover themselves with fig leaves. Then God yells at them, and banishes them from the Garden of Eden to wander the Earth, where they have children, and Cain kills Abel, and so on... As far as I remember, no forgiveness in this story.

It's interesting to me to learn the Islamic version of the story. I think it's much more interesting! I heard once about some of the ancient Hebrew myths that didn't make it into the Old Testament, and I think that story (about angels bowing to Adam, and Lucifer's damnation) was one of them. Another was the one about Lillith, who isn't in the Bible, but "another woman" is mentioned... oh, somewhere in there. :p I'm a little rusty on the finer points.

[Xamonas Chegwe]

I'm sorry Emily, but I'm feeling particularly pedantic tonight. There is no mention of fig leaves in the bible - they didn't appear until renaissance art. ;)

[Whifflingpin]

"I'm feeling particularly pedantic tonight. There is no mention of fig leaves in the bible - they didn't appear until renaissance art. "

"consuerunt folia ficus et fecerunt sibi perizomata "
I'll be a bit pedantic too. I don't know what was in the Hebrew, but the Latin above includes the phrase "folia ficus" which means "fig leaves"
It is from the Adam and Eve story in Jerome's translation of the Bible into Latin, dated about 405AD, that is nearly a thousand years before the renaissance.

[water lily]

I always wondered about those fig leaves.

But I have a question for the atheists: Would you prefer it if God did exist, but are convinced that he does not or that it is impossible? Or do you prefer it that he doesn't?

Hope that was clear.

[RobinHood3000]

Hmm, good question. Me, I prefer to think that the jury is out on that one. My belief is that there's no such thing as an afterlife, but when you think about it, that's a very depressing concept. And though I'm open to the possibility that I may be wrong and that there is a God, I accept (but don't exactly relish) my consequent lot in eternity. Still, I suppose I'll find out eventually--I doubt that personal preference will make any particular outcome any more likely.

[beer good]

I always wondered about those fig leaves.
Carl von Linné - the father of modern botany - suggested that the forbidden fruit was bananas. Because A) they're so sweet it's almost impossible to resist eating them, and B) their leaves are several feet long and cover a lot more than a fig leaf could. (I'm sure Freud might have something to say about the theory of Eve being unable to resist a banana...) :banana:

One question though: as far as I can see, most people in this thread (I haven't read every single post) seem to equate atheism and agnosticism. I've always understood it that atheism is the firm knowledge/belief that there is no such thing as a God, whereas agnosticism is saying that you cannot know whether there is a God or not - and thus labelled myself an agnostic, since it seems to me that outright atheism is simply substituting one belief for another. Is that a meaningful distinction?

To answer water lily: I wouldn't exactly be offended if I died and found out that there is a God. I've got a bunch of questions for Him/Her/Them/It. But whether I would prefer it... tricky question. Would I prefer it if the planet Jupiter existed or not? It really doesn't make much of a difference in how I live my life.

[RobinHood3000]

There is a distinction, but the two systems (agnosticism and atheism) not mutually exclusive. Atheism is indeed the belief that there is no God, while agnosticism is the belief that the presence of God can neither be proven NOR disproven. As most people will tell you, belief and proof are two vastly different things.

[water lily]

Well then according to robin, isn't everyone an agnostic. I don't beleive you can PROVE it one way or the other.
Sponville explained it really well in his book "Presentations de la philosophie", but I don't have the book with me and if I did, it's in french, which would present a problem to most of you. So I will attempt to put the complex idea to my own words.
For atheists, they can't presume to prove the inexistence of a god, because if there is a God then His intellect would so far outstrip their own that they would have no hope of comprehending him. Like a dog, trying to understand human philosophy. They can't know if there is something beyond them, because their intellects don't go "beyond them".
For believers, there is no physical proof, in the existence of a god.
It is the belief that makes the differences, so I would define atheism as the belief in the inexistence of a god, and agnosticism as more of a static state of indecision about the existence/inexistence of a god.

ps. beer good, interesting idea. But it begs the question, in the Garden of Eden, in this state of innocence did sex exist? or did it come in with all the bad stuff?

[RobinHood3000]

Well, there are those that don't count themselves among the agnostics, either because of the negative connotations they may attach to the term, because they believe that God's presence has been manifested in the real world, or because they view the religious text as proof enough of the existence of a God.

[beer good]

I agree that proof shouldn't enter into it (I believe it was Kierkegaard who said that a Christian needs to believe in God precisely BECAUSE His existence cannot be proven, or something to that effect).

And consequently, I call myself an agnostic because I cannot find enough... consistence in the world for me to believe in either one or the other. There's too much wonders in the world for me to say "All I believe is what I can see with my own senses", yet too much stupidity and cruelty for me to believe that there is any intelligence behind it. And so, I remain on the fence, unable to exclude either alternative. (Which is a very blunt way of explaining an process of thought which for me is in its third decade by now, but...)

[Xamonas Chegwe]

Carl von Linné - the father of modern botany - suggested that the forbidden fruit was bananas. Because A) they're so sweet it's almost impossible to resist eating them, and B) their leaves are several feet long and cover a lot more than a fig leaf could. (I'm sure Freud might have something to say about the theory of Eve being unable to resist a banana...) :banana:

I'm allergic to bananas. Beer good, bananas bad. Just think, if it had been Xamonas & Eve, we night still be in Eden. :lol:

[aljurado]

I'm allergic to bananas. Beer good, bananas bad. Just think, if it had been Xamonas & Eve, we night still be in Eden. :lol:

I do not get the sense of your words, my firend.

[beer good]

I'm allergic to bananas. Beer good, bananas bad. Just think, if it had been Xamonas & Eve, we night still be in Eden. :lol:
What about banana beer (http://www.newconsumershop.org/shop/product_info.php?products_id=241)? http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/ernaehrung/food-smiley-015.gif

[emily655321]

But I have a question for the atheists: Would you prefer it if God did exist, but are convinced that he does not or that it is impossible? Or do you prefer it that he doesn't?

Hope that was clear.Very clear. First, let me say I love your avatar, because I don't believe I've done that yet. :D It's lovely.

Personally, I'm not at all opposed to the idea that God may exist. I think it would add some beauty and magic to the world if there were a guiding hand behind it all. It's not an aversion to the idea that caused my disbelief; it's simply not in me to believe. I think it would be lovely if elves and fairies existed, too, and unicorns. Inside me is always a bit of sadness—well, a lot of sadness, but a bit of it quardoned off to the idea that there are no magic gardens and groves of talking animals having tea parties and things, like in Disney movies. But that's a wish, not a reality. I think of God the same way.

Perhaps I am really an agnostic, but I never describe myself as such because, in my experience, the word holds some pretentious associations. I've heard people describe themselves as such who then go on to say scathing things about religion, and I feel as though they only adopted the label to sound more open-minded than they are. In theory, I believe I should give equal credit to the ideas of the religious as I do to those of athiests. I think there is no way of knowing whether or not there really is a God, and I would be pleasantly surprised to die and discover that there is yet more to come. But, in practice, the gut feeling inside of me is that there is not, and so I describe myself as an atheist.

[XXdarkclarityXX]

:eek2: Ladies and gentlemen, this thread is now hijacked.

[emily655321]

Worry not, XXdarkclarityXX (do you have a real name by which we can call you?), I have reclaimed it. :D

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Name? Dissent is my name, and it is I who plagues the realm of tranquility in this tangible world which we call life. My identity is that which articulates the nature of my personality. Therefore you may call me dissent. Ahhh the amusement of the intellectually blind! The splendor of those who speak but know not! How the folly of human views have perverted the truth, such a melancholy tale is this! No, there is nothing left now. Merely the remnants of dark clarity. Find what you can in the dark and elucidate. Find a target in the dark and take a shot. It's all that's left. When the light invades the void of visual knowledge that is the darkness, the truth will surely nullify the effort made by your senses to rationalize such a phenomenon. Enlighten and be awakened! Hide not in the darkness, for the light is what is needed now...take not what you want, take what is necessary! The time has arisen to abandon the depths of the unknown to begin traveling the path which leads to what is and what can be. Be not idle, be not still in the dark! All will be dark in the realm of the unknown...

[RobinHood3000]

Careful around whom you say the words "take a shot," XXdarkclarityXX...:p


http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb001.gifhttp://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb043.gif

[XXdarkclarityXX]

Just keep your quiver full, Robin....