I am the one Supreme Being to me. You are the Supreme Being to you. People are afraid of responsibility. Of power. Of control. That's why religion exists. "God" was created to scare people into doing/not doing things, take responsibility for the bad, and make people feel better about death. I say, screw death. Life is the eternal happiness. It is just up to you, not Iehovah, to make it so.
I didn't read your original post, but I think you said you were atheist. Wouldn't your sentiment make you something like a spiritualist?
I didn't read your original post, but I think you said you were atheist. Wouldn't your sentiment make you something like a spiritualist?
Well... Pssh... Uh... Depends. I believe people are people. There are no souls, no afterlife, no "great creation," no "god" in the religious sense. Just that people are individuals. They have ultimate control over there lives. I have an extended metaphor that I wrote for an essay once that sums it up nicely. Basically, life is a mine and people are the miners. The rock can influence you to go one way, but it cannot force you, and it is up to you whether or not you reach the gold.
I'm an atheist, and proud of it. I am one of the few who takes atheism as a religion, and I support that belief. Atheism is the belief that there is no god, not the belief of no religion.
spir·it·u·al·ism
/ˈspɪrɪtʃuəˌlɪzəm/ Show Spelled[spir-i-choo-uh-liz-uhm]
–noun
1. the belief or doctrine that the spirits of the dead, surviving after the mortal life, can and do communicate with the living, especially through a person (a medium) particularly susceptible to their influence.
No spirits. The dead are dead. The end. Uh-uh. Nada. Total blackout.
I'm an atheist, and proud of it. I am one of the few who takes atheism as a religion, and I support that belief. Atheism is the belief that there is no god, not the belief of no religion.
Atheism is the knowledge that there is no god. Agnosticism is the belief. Atheism is fouled by two groups; the aggressively-against-religion atheist, and the depressed-that-there-is-no-god atheist.
Wrong, Tom. Atheism is the belief that there is no god or afterlife or anything. Agnosticism is the belief that it's impossible to know one way or the other. It's basically being open to the possibility of a higher being, but not knowing if there actually is anything.
Wrong, Tom. Atheism is the belief that there is no god or afterlife or anything. Agnosticism is the belief that it's impossible to know one way or the other. It's basically being open to the possibility of a higher being, but not knowing if there actually is anything.
I dont really care to be honest. I dont really believe that one person could create the world in a week, so I just go "Science did it!" or something. Again, I doesnt really bother me how we got here, the fact is, we're here, and I'm happy with that. What happens after we die? Who knows, but I'm not worried about that, even if it is just a world of nothing, I just say make the most of your life, carpe diem peeps!
P.S. I do believe that there was a man called Jesus who was a very good man and helped a lot of people. Pretty much, I believe some parts of the Bible, there's just a lot of things (especially the creation of the world) that dont mesh with my sense of logic.
I dont really care to be honest. I dont really believe that one person could create the world in a week, so I just go "Science did it!" or something. Again, I doesnt really bother me how we got here, the fact is, we're here, and I'm happy with that. What happens after we die? Who knows, but I'm not worried about that, even if it is just a world of nothing, I just say make the most of your life, carpe diem peeps!
P.S. I do believe that there was a man called Jesus who was a very good man and helped a lot of people. Pretty much, I believe some parts of the Bible, there's just a lot of things (especially the creation of the world) that dont mesh with my sense of logic.
What happens after we die? Who knows, but I'm not worried about that, even if it is just a world of nothing, I just say make the most of your life, carpe diem peeps!
That's right. I don't get why so many cling to religion because they're afraid of what will happen to them when they die (not saying that's the only reason to be religious). If you don't have an eternal soul, you're not going to know that and be worried about it anyway when that time comes, right?
Prophets were some Übermenschs who wanted the power and tried to get it by changeing society's values for their own benefits. They used the unknown to brainwash people and they killed anyone who disagreed with them and pretended it's for the higher "good" ... while there is no good and bad out there
No-one knows if there is a god or not.
But there is one thing for sure, God and Satan are the same.
God is guilty for making us humans biased minded. That's the only guilt there is.
I used to be an agnostic. Now I'm an atheist and more comfortable with my belief, or lack thereof, than ever.
That's right. I don't get why so many cling to religion because they're afraid of what will happen to them when they die (not saying that's the only reason to be religious). If you don't have an eternal soul, you're not going to know that and be worried about it anyway when that time comes, right?
I'm sure some believe for that reason but I think anyone who endures with their faith long enough realizes it's an irrational reason to believe.
Prophets were some Übermenschs who wanted the power and tried to get it by changeing society's values for their own benefits. They used the unknown to brainwash people and they killed anyone who disagreed with them and pretended it's for the higher "good" ... while there is no good and bad out there
No-one knows if there is a god or not.
But there is one thing for sure, God and Satan are the same.
God is guilty for making us humans biased minded. That's the only guilt there is.
If the Jesus story is true, there's little about him that was concerned with political change. I don't remember him killing anyone.
Prophets were some Übermenschs who wanted the power and tried to get it by changeing society's values for their own benefits. They used the unknown to brainwash people and they killed anyone who disagreed with them and pretended it's for the higher "good" ... while there is no good and bad out there
I dont really care to be honest. I dont really believe that one person could create the world in a week, so I just go "Science did it!" or something. Again, I doesnt really bother me how we got here, the fact is, we're here, and I'm happy with that. What happens after we die? Who knows, but I'm not worried about that, even if it is just a world of nothing, I just say make the most of your life, carpe diem peeps!
P.S. I do believe that there was a man called Jesus who was a very good man and helped a lot of people. Pretty much, I believe some parts of the Bible, there's just a lot of things (especially the creation of the world) that dont mesh with my sense of logic.
Again, loathe to argue theological points, but it's only recently that 7 day literalism has consumed so much of the Christian religion. Plenty of Judaic and Christian interpreters took it as a metaphor. I think Origen did, most certainly Augustine did not.
The Mithra debate is an interesting point but a long one to debate. I'm not satisfied in its proponents given the secretive, fraternal nature of its believers, small scope and foreign origins as a likely influence. If one believes it was introduced as a way to evolving a new religion it requires a belief that Christianity was a cohesive force at its inception with some sort of overriding authority, which it most certainly could not have been.
I dont really care to be honest. I dont really believe that one person could create the world in a week, so I just go "Science did it!" or something. Again, I doesnt really bother me how we got here, the fact is, we're here, and I'm happy with that. What happens after we die? Who knows, but I'm not worried about that, even if it is just a world of nothing, I just say make the most of your life, carpe diem peeps!
P.S. I do believe that there was a man called Jesus who was a very good man and helped a lot of people. Pretty much, I believe some parts of the Bible, there's just a lot of things (especially the creation of the world) that dont mesh with my sense of logic.
Well it doesn't have to be taken literally or believed 100% word-for-word. As I said in my initial post in this thread, I take the early part of Genesis as a metaphor - a metaphor for evolution. I believe that the big bang and the evolution process took place, but I also think that there was a guiding hand over the whole process; I believe that the science involved in evolution was created by God and used as his tool in shaping this universe of ours. The concept of this world being created in seven days also seems silly to me, but these 'days' may of course not even be actual days, but rather longer periods of time that a simply referred to as 'days.'
The seven day question always begs the point, how do you communicate the creation of the universe to an ancient culture unfamiliar with the workings of nuclear properties and basic cosmological details. The point is that you don't, you get the gist across in a way that they understand but that can be communicated across time.
Not saying this is my stance but it's the perspective of the 7 days from others. You can ask others, primarily theoretical physicists, about the property of light behavior close to the point of the big bang and how its speed was slower, but I'd pick the first response over the second. Not that the second isn't fascinating to ponder.
If the Jesus story is true, there's little about him that was concerned with political change. I don't remember him killing anyone.
Maybe he just didn't have enough time, that is, if the stories *are* true.
I think Mitchel Hiesman did a research on that in his Suicide Note before he blew his brains out. It's titled "Jesus of Nazareth, or, How a *censored* Outsider Became a Jewish Insider, Turning Jewish Values Outside In". Here's the index of the PDF version.
Maybe he just didn't have enough time, that is, if the stories *are* true.
I think Mitchel Hiesman did a research on that in his Suicide Note before he blew his brains out. It's titled "Jesus of Nazareth, or, How a *censored* Outsider Became a Jewish Insider, Turning Jewish Values Outside In". Here's the index of the PDF version.
I do believe it's an interesting theoretical read, but too much relies on assumption for me to be comfortable with his approach.
This has lasted 8 hours, might be a record for the internet....
Probably because we have relatively down-to-earth people on this forum, rather than it being packed with tons of arrogant teenagers who think that announcing their atheism to the world and claiming that all religions are a load crap (without giving any proof or reasoning) is the coolest thing one can possibly do.
I do believe it's an interesting theoretical read, but too much relies on assumption for me to be comfortable with his approach.
No no, I didn't explain it clearly.
He doesn't assume the stories on Jesus are not true.
I meant I *think* he did an accurate research on the subject, I emphasis on think because I haven't read the "note" yet ...
The term is sadly often misunderstood - Christians, and even plenty of non-religious people, often take the term to mean the belief that there is no god.
However, the more common way to be an atheist is to have a lack of belief in a god, due to lack of evidence.
In other words, it's not a positive belief there is no god, but rather simply a lack of belief.
Which are two quite different positions!
Correct. I'm a deist. Which means I don't believe any of the religions that offer a stream of other restricting rules alongside the idea of a god (who is also restricted by definition). Okay I'm sorry, but I don't think if there is any sentient power with such a tremendous power, it wouldn't care if one carbon-based waterballoon was swiping a pack of steaks from a supermarket or doesn't go to church/mosque enough. Well, I believe it's a cutesy thing to teach ethics to people while also telling them there is a god, you know, many people tend to believe in that they aren't as superior and there may be something stronger than them; and once you make them believe in that, you can tell them to do whatever you want. Such a power of wording was used to restore ethical balance among other deeds and I guess it was actually quite needed. Some people wants to believe in and live accordingly, and some wants to just strive for more, filling in the blanks that are normally filled by religion, with science or own morals and goals that aren't preferred when you're a religious person. One of them is art; art is actually a confusing debate in Islam, the religion I was raised with. Art basically gives the person the illusion and the courage to be able to "create" things, and since god is known to be the only thing that has the power to create, there is a conflict that religion itself tries to wipe out. Oh, and, another reason is that, prophet Mohammed never wanted himself to be drawn or sculpted so that people would remember him by his deeds and not by his visual, which is a slight nod to Christianity. Uhh, okay, well, my point is, I'm trying to be an artist and redeeming everything that I was led to believe definitive truth... uh... what's the nicest thing to say there, oh yes; complete bullshit. BUT it's the bullshit that needs to be around there to maintain order, or at least, "enough" order. I'm just not buying it personally.
I'm a Christian. I should note in saying this that Christianity is far from united in ita beliefs and that the typical homophobe conservative harsh stereotypical Christian does not exist as any majority of people who call themselves Christian. We agree on a few basic points and branch out dramatically from there.
Faith is, for me, an integral part of my life and an extreme challenge. If we are not to kill or murder, how do we defend ourselves righteously? Is capital punishment then an abomination? What exactly is sexuality and how do we exhibit it well when we're all so messed up? I wont pretend to know any absolute answer to these questions and I'm certain that I will not obtain said answers before I die, but I ask myself so many questions in a given day that I might best serve the God I believe in and honor his sacrifice and grace and beauty.
I think there are many different types of Atheists, some are smart(like Ricky Gervais) some are dumb(like people who blame religion for all the worlds problems)
In Sweden, where i live, we have a dumb group of Atheists called the "Humanists", instead of promoting a secular state(and discuss some of the problems, such as Religious schools for children where many of them are brainwashed, and religious extremism)they paid a advertising campaign where the signs said: "God dosen't exist".
Personally i am Agnostic, just because these things are so vast and huge, that no one can tell for sure if God exists or not.
In Sweden, where i live, we have a dumb group of Atheists called the "Humanists", instead of promoting a secular state(and discuss some of the problems, such as Religious schools for children where many of them are brainwashed, and religious extremism)they paid a advertising campaign where the signs said: "God dosen't exist".
As a Secular Humanist, I don't think you know what a Secular Humanist is. It is not merely a group, but rather a philosophical view. I'm very tired and about to dose off, so here's the Wikipedia description.
Secular Humanism, alternatively known as Humanism (often with a capital H to distinguish it from other forms of humanism), is a secular philosophy that espouses human reason, ethics, and justice, and the search for human fulfillment. It specifically rejects religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience or superstition as the basis of morality and decision-making.
Secular Humanism is a comprehensive life stance that focuses on the way human beings can lead happy and functional lives. Though it posits that human beings are capable of being ethical and moral without religion or God, it neither assumes humans to be inherently or innately good, nor presents humans as "above nature" or superior to it. Rather, the Humanist life stance emphasizes the unique responsibility facing humanity and the ethical consequences of human decisions. Fundamental to the concept of Secular Humanism is the strongly held belief that ideology — be it religious or political — must be thoroughly examined by each individual and not simply accepted or rejected on faith. Along with this belief, an essential part of Secular Humanism is a continually adapting search for truth, primarily through science and philosophy.
I really don't appreciate you taking a piss on my view point off the single act of people. Especially when you obviously don't know what you're talking about. I know, I know, this might seem appeal-ish to authority, but when you call Humanists stupid, you're calling Terry Pratchett, Philip Pullman, Bill Nye, James Randi, Isaac Asimov, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Joss Whedon, Rod Serling, Gene Roddenberry, hell even Albert Einstein and Carl Sagan stupid.
Personally i am Agnostic, just because these things are so vast and huge, that no one can tell for sure if God exists or not.
Sure, I can't say for certain that there isn't a deity, but surely you have a better reason than "I'm not sure how it works therefore God", right?
Also, just a quick note about Pascal's wager. Sure that might sound fine and dandy, but you quickly run into two problems: 1) Which religion? 2) If no religion turns out to be true, or you picked the wrong religion, you just wasted a good chunk of your life.
This topic is such a piece of shit. Religion "discussion" is boring because every single topic about it on every single forum always goes exactly the same way.
Also, just a quick note about Pascal's wager. Sure that might sound fine and dandy, but you quickly run into two problems: 1) Which religion? 2) If no religion turns out to be true, or you picked the wrong religion, you just wasted a good chunk of your life.
I'm more inclined to think that if there is a big man in te sky he's not gonna bother over specifics whether you call him God or Allah or whatever. A being that supposedly created the universe isn't gonna get petty over the fine print.
This topic is such a piece of shit. Religion "discussion" is boring because every single topic about it on every single forum always goes exactly the same way.
Two things
A. It's more about the poll, to see how the forum as a whole's inclined, people are always free to discuss of course.
Comments
I didn't read your original post, but I think you said you were atheist. Wouldn't your sentiment make you something like a spiritualist?
I think it said he was god of the athiests.
Well... Pssh... Uh... Depends. I believe people are people. There are no souls, no afterlife, no "great creation," no "god" in the religious sense. Just that people are individuals. They have ultimate control over there lives. I have an extended metaphor that I wrote for an essay once that sums it up nicely. Basically, life is a mine and people are the miners. The rock can influence you to go one way, but it cannot force you, and it is up to you whether or not you reach the gold.
I somehow read this as infarction and thought you wanted to give her a heart attack. I wasn't quite sure how this would be managed online.
He's horrible at writing his way out of causing offense, then.
Yeah, that has nothing to do with atheism or your little "theory." You're a spiritualist if you believe as you say you do.
I just wrote that originally as a joke, and again as a big you-know-what to Guru.
No spirits. The dead are dead. The end. Uh-uh. Nada. Total blackout.
Still no.
All reality is actuality. There is no spirits. I don't mean "gods" in the literal sense.
Atheism is the knowledge that there is no god. Agnosticism is the belief. Atheism is fouled by two groups; the aggressively-against-religion atheist, and the depressed-that-there-is-no-god atheist.
Well, if you want to get all technical, I guess...
Atheists are arrogant. Agnostics are *censored*
Wow, Tommy. You're a god amongst men, Tommyboy.
I'm loathe to discuss theology but technically it's not a battle.
P.S. I do believe that there was a man called Jesus who was a very good man and helped a lot of people. Pretty much, I believe some parts of the Bible, there's just a lot of things (especially the creation of the world) that dont mesh with my sense of logic.
I'd recommend Zeitgeist, but this works much better.
That's right. I don't get why so many cling to religion because they're afraid of what will happen to them when they die (not saying that's the only reason to be religious). If you don't have an eternal soul, you're not going to know that and be worried about it anyway when that time comes, right?
No-one knows if there is a god or not.
But there is one thing for sure, God and Satan are the same.
God is guilty for making us humans biased minded. That's the only guilt there is.
I'm sure some believe for that reason but I think anyone who endures with their faith long enough realizes it's an irrational reason to believe.
If the Jesus story is true, there's little about him that was concerned with political change. I don't remember him killing anyone.
Exactly the truth.
Again, loathe to argue theological points, but it's only recently that 7 day literalism has consumed so much of the Christian religion. Plenty of Judaic and Christian interpreters took it as a metaphor. I think Origen did, most certainly Augustine did not.
The Mithra debate is an interesting point but a long one to debate. I'm not satisfied in its proponents given the secretive, fraternal nature of its believers, small scope and foreign origins as a likely influence. If one believes it was introduced as a way to evolving a new religion it requires a belief that Christianity was a cohesive force at its inception with some sort of overriding authority, which it most certainly could not have been.
Well it doesn't have to be taken literally or believed 100% word-for-word. As I said in my initial post in this thread, I take the early part of Genesis as a metaphor - a metaphor for evolution. I believe that the big bang and the evolution process took place, but I also think that there was a guiding hand over the whole process; I believe that the science involved in evolution was created by God and used as his tool in shaping this universe of ours. The concept of this world being created in seven days also seems silly to me, but these 'days' may of course not even be actual days, but rather longer periods of time that a simply referred to as 'days.'
Not saying this is my stance but it's the perspective of the 7 days from others. You can ask others, primarily theoretical physicists, about the property of light behavior close to the point of the big bang and how its speed was slower, but I'd pick the first response over the second. Not that the second isn't fascinating to ponder.
I think Mitchel Hiesman did a research on that in his Suicide Note before he blew his brains out. It's titled "Jesus of Nazareth, or, How a *censored* Outsider Became a Jewish Insider, Turning Jewish Values Outside In".
Here's the index of the PDF version.
I do believe it's an interesting theoretical read, but too much relies on assumption for me to be comfortable with his approach.
Probably because we have relatively down-to-earth people on this forum, rather than it being packed with tons of arrogant teenagers who think that announcing their atheism to the world and claiming that all religions are a load crap (without giving any proof or reasoning) is the coolest thing one can possibly do.
It almost didn't make it that far. Whether or not it'll continue to endure has yet to be seen.
That will probably depend on how frequently Tom decides to post.
He doesn't assume the stories on Jesus are not true.
I meant I *think* he did an accurate research on the subject, I emphasis on think because I haven't read the "note" yet ...
The same could be said of all threads.
Correct. I'm a deist. Which means I don't believe any of the religions that offer a stream of other restricting rules alongside the idea of a god (who is also restricted by definition). Okay I'm sorry, but I don't think if there is any sentient power with such a tremendous power, it wouldn't care if one carbon-based waterballoon was swiping a pack of steaks from a supermarket or doesn't go to church/mosque enough. Well, I believe it's a cutesy thing to teach ethics to people while also telling them there is a god, you know, many people tend to believe in that they aren't as superior and there may be something stronger than them; and once you make them believe in that, you can tell them to do whatever you want. Such a power of wording was used to restore ethical balance among other deeds and I guess it was actually quite needed. Some people wants to believe in and live accordingly, and some wants to just strive for more, filling in the blanks that are normally filled by religion, with science or own morals and goals that aren't preferred when you're a religious person. One of them is art; art is actually a confusing debate in Islam, the religion I was raised with. Art basically gives the person the illusion and the courage to be able to "create" things, and since god is known to be the only thing that has the power to create, there is a conflict that religion itself tries to wipe out. Oh, and, another reason is that, prophet Mohammed never wanted himself to be drawn or sculpted so that people would remember him by his deeds and not by his visual, which is a slight nod to Christianity. Uhh, okay, well, my point is, I'm trying to be an artist and redeeming everything that I was led to believe definitive truth... uh... what's the nicest thing to say there, oh yes; complete bullshit. BUT it's the bullshit that needs to be around there to maintain order, or at least, "enough" order. I'm just not buying it personally.
Faith is, for me, an integral part of my life and an extreme challenge. If we are not to kill or murder, how do we defend ourselves righteously? Is capital punishment then an abomination? What exactly is sexuality and how do we exhibit it well when we're all so messed up? I wont pretend to know any absolute answer to these questions and I'm certain that I will not obtain said answers before I die, but I ask myself so many questions in a given day that I might best serve the God I believe in and honor his sacrifice and grace and beauty.
In Sweden, where i live, we have a dumb group of Atheists called the "Humanists", instead of promoting a secular state(and discuss some of the problems, such as Religious schools for children where many of them are brainwashed, and religious extremism)they paid a advertising campaign where the signs said: "God dosen't exist".
Personally i am Agnostic, just because these things are so vast and huge, that no one can tell for sure if God exists or not.
As a Secular Humanist, I don't think you know what a Secular Humanist is. It is not merely a group, but rather a philosophical view. I'm very tired and about to dose off, so here's the Wikipedia description.
I really don't appreciate you taking a piss on my view point off the single act of people. Especially when you obviously don't know what you're talking about. I know, I know, this might seem appeal-ish to authority, but when you call Humanists stupid, you're calling Terry Pratchett, Philip Pullman, Bill Nye, James Randi, Isaac Asimov, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Joss Whedon, Rod Serling, Gene Roddenberry, hell even Albert Einstein and Carl Sagan stupid.
Sure, I can't say for certain that there isn't a deity, but surely you have a better reason than "I'm not sure how it works therefore God", right?
Also, just a quick note about Pascal's wager. Sure that might sound fine and dandy, but you quickly run into two problems: 1) Which religion? 2) If no religion turns out to be true, or you picked the wrong religion, you just wasted a good chunk of your life.
Anyways, back into hibernation.
I'm more inclined to think that if there is a big man in te sky he's not gonna bother over specifics whether you call him God or Allah or whatever. A being that supposedly created the universe isn't gonna get petty over the fine print.
Two things
A. It's more about the poll, to see how the forum as a whole's inclined, people are always free to discuss of course.
B. You're a piece of shit