Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on December 05, 2002, 07:35:55 AM
-
Teenagers who attend worship and rate religion as important have positive self-images, are optimistic and enjoy
school, a study released yesterday said. The survey of thousands of 12th-grade students found that optimism and confidence correlate with exposure to religion as much as with success, race, wealth or "self-esteem" education in public schools."The more religious the kids are, based on its importance to them or their attending worship, the greater their positive outlook on life," said sociologist Chris Smith of the University of North Carolina, where the National Study of Youth and Religion is being conducted. "The most striking finding, he said, is that nonreligious students "hate school" more.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021205-16184008.htm
-
I've been atheist and agnostic by turns since I was 10 years old.
I used to go to Sunday School and Church; then I took off the rose tinted spectacles, looked at the world in a clear light and thought for myself.
The concept of a benign god, with a great unfathomable plan which should include such horrifying events as the Holocaust and the day to day, mundane torture, killing and misery struck me as absurd.
From then on, I excelled academically and would consider myself well adjusted socially. I don't suffer from depression and I laugh alot.
Despite this study, I still believe religion should be separated from the school curriculum, apart from Religious Study, which would examine all major religions and secular beliefs. That's the approach I was taught, and I learnt alot about Hinduism, Islam, Christianity etc. It taught me alot about the motivations of others.
Ignorance is the enemy.
-
Do you consider yourself optimistic or pessimistic? (I can tell you that you appear Pessimistic in your posts, 95% of the time)
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
I've been atheist and agnostic by turns since I was 10 years old.
you figured out the world by age 10 did you ???
LOL
-
Think the key sentence was "since age 10" Eagler.
-
I disagree, Ripsnort. I'm a skeptic, definitely. I spent 4 years studying hard, cold science - it leaves an impression on the way you think. I also believe that the nature of the topics here might heavily bias any impression you have of me.
Having said that, I had several very Christian friends who studied the same course and my best mate was a devout Catholic.
However, London women have put an end to his piety, if you know what I mean.
Eagler - read what you quoted again. I believe you're putting words in my mouth.
Moreover, have Christians got the world figured out? Or do they simply give a theological shrug of the shoulders, and put everything down to the 'Wonder that is God'?
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
Moreover, have Christians got the world figured out? Or do they simply give a theological shrug of the shoulders, and put everything down to the 'Wonder that is God'?
I think you missed the point of the article. A good outlook in life thru religion can be a positive thing. Its not that Christians have the world figured out, its that they have THEMSELVES figured out. I'm sure you're familiar with the psychological term called "Teenage Identity Crisis"...if you've gotten past this thru religion, your more apt to have less stress amongst your peers because frankly you could care less what they think about you. This leaves the student to tackle more important things like school work.
-
Fair point. But do you need an overseeing omnipotent deity to know yourself and who you are? And to succeed? I disagree. Personally, what drove me academically was the complete belief that I didn't want to end up like the people around me - there were few jobs without higher qualifications. My parents have been brilliant - I was/am very lucky to have them and I will do well to be half as supportive/encouraging as they were, when the time comes to raise a family myself.
I was also competitive and enjoyed success.
It wasn't all plain sailing, sure, but hey that's life! ;)
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
Fair point. But do you need an overseeing omnipotent deity to know yourself and who you are? And to succeed?
Not everyone does. Some people do need guidence. Thats the optimistic viewpoint ;)
-
"Note that the cross-sectional data (gathered at one point in time, not over time) upon which the analyses in this report are based make it difficult to determine the direction of cause and effect between religion and life attitudes and self-images. It might be that religion influences youth to have more positive attitudes and self-images. It also might be that youth and families who are already predisposed to be positive choose to become more religiously involved as one strategy to pursue that kind of lifestyle. It might also be that some youth who for whatever reasons develop negative attitudes about themselves and their lives subsequently reduce their religious involvements and so count on surveys as less religious. It might be that some other unknown factor influences youth both to be religious and to have more positive attitudes, or a combination of these influences might operate to produce the results presented in this report."
-
Originally posted by popeye
"Note that the cross-sectional data (gathered at one point in time, not over time) upon which the analyses in this report are based make it difficult to determine the direction of cause and effect between religion and life attitudes and self-images. It might be that religion influences youth to have more positive attitudes and self-images. It also might be that youth and families who are already predisposed to be positive choose to become more religiously involved as one strategy to pursue that kind of lifestyle. It might also be that some youth who for whatever reasons develop negative attitudes about themselves and their lives subsequently reduce their religious involvements and so count on surveys as less religious. It might be that some other unknown factor influences youth both to be religious and to have more positive attitudes, or a combination of these influences might operate to produce the results presented in this report."
Your showing your pessimistic side Popeye ;)
-
Picturing one of the blonde vapid "Up With People" singers saying..
"I'm just so totally up about life!" "By golly, if it weren't for Jesus I'd be getting B's in School and have way more acne!"
-
I find it always pays to read the fine print -- especially for Social "Science".
-
God is a personal thing. How can science kill your faith? Easy. Scientists say we crawled out of the ocean and religion (At least Christianity) says we were created by God.
So you say, "HAR HAR! We crawled out of the ocean! Christianity is clearly wrong!"
Maybe not. You need to take a step back. What you are and what I am is more than science will ever be able to understand. Does that mean there is a God?
When the universe was created there was absolutely no light. According to cold hard science, the universe just one day 'appeared'. But it was pitch black.
Things were swirling and colliding and everything was expanding at a rapid pace, but it did so in complete and utter darkness. Then one day, LIGHT! This is science. This also has a striking resemblence to the old testament's description of the creation.
Then life. Where does life come from? It comes from cosmic dust. Everything that we know to exsist comes from cosmic dust. Does this mean there isn't a God?
Then came us. According to science we decended from monkeys, but as of right now, there is no link. We just one day appeared. Even if there is a link, does evolution mean there isn't a God?
You need to have an open mind. No matter how great you are, you'll never understand everything completely.
According to my belief, God wants you (and everyone) to know him. He has broad shoulders. You can tell him you're angry. You can tell him you don't believe.
I bet the one moment you set aside what you're doing and make an effort to investigate further, you'll find something just under the surface.
Read a gospel. Do it only for the scientific and historical value. Maybe you'll feel the enormity of what really happened 2,000 years ago and why so many people in the world believe.
Anyway, this is really long winded. All I wanted to say was don't set aside God just because the scientific data doesn't appear to match up.
Beeker
-
Hell... and all this time I thought religion was linked to terrorism.
-
Things were swirling and colliding and everything was expanding at a rapid pace, but it did so in complete and utter darkness.
This is untrue. The Big Bang was the starting point - there was no expansion followed by the Big Bang. It was the Big Bang followed by expansion.
Everything that we know to exsist comes from cosmic dust.
Not quite. All matter originates from the nuclear processes occuring in stars.
Then one day, LIGHT! This is science. This also has a striking resemblence to the old testament's description of the creation.
So does the sunrise, but we seemed to have explained that quite well, have we not?
Then came us. According to science we decended from monkeys, but as of right now, there is no link.
I think it would be more accurate to say that, as of now, the link has remains undiscovered. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Science gets closer every day.
According to my belief, God wants you (and everyone) to know him.
So he has an acute case of Egotistical Deity Syndrome? ;)
If he's an attention seeker, then by casually allowing atrocity after atrocity, then he's got my attention. If, for example, he starts striking down war criminals instead of letting them live comfortable lives in Argentina, I'll be in a church tomorrow. You might say they will be judged when they die, but what kind of deterrence of that? It would be much better to flay them alive in one quick flick of his mighty wrist as a warning to bastards every where, than let them defy him.
I bet the one moment you set aside what you're doing and make an effort to investigate further, you'll find something just under the surface.
I've read the Bible. I've read parts of the Qu'ran and Bhagavad Gita. The only things that strike me is how similar they are, and also how hypocritical the followers of those words truly are. Some are hypocritical in small ways. Others, like Bin Laden, the Crusaders, even Hitler are hypocritical to a point where they ruin the lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions.
Anyway, this is really long winded. All I wanted to say was don't set aside God just because the scientific data doesn't appear to match up.
I set god (Christian, Islamic or whatever) aside on behalf of the poor bastards who's every waking moment is a hell on earth. I simply fail to understand how the crappy things that happen in the world are somehow neccessary.
But hey, I'm just a mortal - and a sheep in a flock, as it were. ;)
-
if religion helps you become a better person...good for you.
just don't get me involved with your religion:D or your stats about religion....or i'll come back and show you how many wars where started cause of religion.
religion or not.....if ye born dipchit..ye die a dipchit
-
This is untrue. The Big Bang was the starting point - there was no expansion followed by the Big Bang. It was the Big Bang followed by expansion.
I never said there wasn't a Big Bang. After the Big Bang, there was no light. Before the Big Bang, there was nothing.
Not quite. All matter originates from the nuclear processes occuring in stars.
:rolleyes:
Where do stars come from?
If he's an attention seeker, then by casually allowing atrocity after atrocity, then he's got my attention. If, for example, he starts striking down war criminals instead of letting them live comfortable lives in Argentina, I'll be in a church tomorrow. You might say they will be judged when they die, but what kind of deterrence of that? It would be much better to flay them alive in one quick flick of his mighty wrist as a warning to bastards every where, than let them defy him.
You live in a fantasy world. You think because there are horrible atrocities there is no God. That's a very naive way of thinking about the world. Childlike almost. No offense meant though!
Bad things happen to good people. It doesn't mean there isn't a God. Like here I am talking about God. Does that mean that God would spare me if someone was holding a knife to my throat? I don't thnk so.
We have free will. No one is going to pat you on the back because you're a good boy unless they want to. No one is going to reform the government, the world, whatever -- unless they want to. God doesn't force anything on anyone.
If you're a dumbshit or sick murderer... it's your fault. You take responsibility for your own actions. If you're lazy, your fault. If you're fat -- lose the weight tubbo. God isn't going to make all the bad people go away. God helps people who help themselves. He inspires.
If you just sit and crying 'Why? why? why?' what good are you?
The reason you and I are like we are is due to the fact we can do whatever we want. God doesn't strike down evildoers. The world is a rough difficult place and totally unfair, but that has no bearing on whether there is a God or not.
Beeker
-
Originally posted by EvilDingo
You live in a fantasy world. You think because there are horrible atrocities there is no God. That's a very naive way of thinking about the world. Childlike almost. No offense meant though!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naive& child like.....Doh!!! your the one who believes in Fictitious people(GOD)....your the one who lives in that naive & child like world bud.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God doesn't strike down evildoers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
no he CREATES them
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The world is a rough difficult place and totally unfair.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But he CREATED this world...whatta nice guy your GOD.
Beeker
-
How many of those kids were on ritalin or prozac?
I hated school BECAUSE it was a religious one. I went to public school later and enjoyed it a whole lot more.
-SW
-
manipulating science and math for political reasons is really quite abhorrent to a hardcore nerd like myself. the fact that it was done with government funding proves the disingenuousness of the authors and makes the whole thing twice as disgusting
-
God doesn't strike down evildoers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
no he CREATES them
No he doesn't. If you're an evildoer, it's YOU who created you. Why do you blame your (and other's) faults on God? If you suck, it's your damn fault. Take responsibility!
Do you think God creating people with the intention of playing with them like G.I. Joes? Okay, besides the point you don't believe (which I really don't care if you do or not), just follow along here... God created people with free will. If you run over your dearest little cat Mitsy, God didn't do it, you did!
If you blow up a market square and kill 50 people. You did it. Not God.
Maybe if you stopped crying all the time blaming the worlds problems on everyone else, you might see that.
Then again, you probably just wrote that to get a reaction. In that case, I'll let you know, I don't give two toejams on what you believe. I'm not trying to convert you.
Therefore, if you don't believe in any of this, why are you responding to this thread? I just read a cool thread on guns. I don't have a gun and have never shot one before.
So I didn't bother posting.
The world is a rough difficult place and totally unfair.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But he CREATED this world...whatta nice guy your GOD.
So what are you? If you're an athiest, you sure are putting up a fuss aren't you?
Back to the point. God created the world. And he created humans. YOU made the world unfair. YOU make wars. Why do you think God would want to control you like a puppet? Is this a difficult thing to understand? Do you expect God to micromanage your life? If he doesn't, does that mean he doesn't care or exist?
SLO, you don't bother me.
Beeker
-
SLO, you don't bother me.
Beeker
DOH!!! and here i was askin myself how I can bother you....:p
-
Who created god.
Would be kinda helpful if he could micromanage some of his priests, specially the catholic faction. Wonder if those choir-boys are 'optimists'.
Originally posted by EvilDingo
Back to the point. God created the world. And he created humans. YOU made the world unfair. YOU make wars. Why do you think God would want to control you like a puppet? Is this a difficult thing to understand? Do you expect God to micromanage your life? If he doesn't, does that mean he doesn't care or exist?
-
hehe
Another God thread :)
-
Pessimists are optimists with some experience ;)
Blitz
-
Optimists are pessimists with prescriptions. :)
-
Gods loves everyone...except us idiots in the O'Club.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Who created god....
more importanly - who created toilet paper?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Gods loves everyone...except us idiots in the O'Club.
Aye - we ask too many questions.
-
So true believers are optimists? I always thought one had to be seriously optimistic to believe all that stuff - but I just put that down to cynicism. Now I find it may well be true ;)
-
Child-like and naive... ok. Keep on reading that 2000 year old book, written by people who couldn't explain the nature of rain, edited as part of a political process in the first few centuries after its writing. No offence meant though!
-
Dowding... you sillyhead - GOD makes rain!
-
I've only met three or four real Christians in my life. People that actually follow and live by the teachings of Christ. The rest just go to church to be seen or it's politicaly expediante.
I'm not a Christian because it's too much work.. Turn the other cheek?... naw.. I plummet the other cheek.. Forgive your enemy?.. Chaka Zulu says leave no enemy behind.. that makes better sense. (that was a good mini series BTW.. watched the whole thing) Accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savor.. Well that part is cool... you mean he died on the cross for my sins?.. That means I can do plenty more sinnin' before it comes time to confess.. bah what a bunch of nonsense.
-
hehe i sure wouldn't site optimism as a credit- it might also imply a naive worldview just as easily.
why does that seem so typically christian though? maybe because they can field a question like:
"why does a supposedly loving caring god allow so much suffering and evil?"
with a stock answer like:
a. "it's part of his magic plan and we are too primitive to understand!"
b. "god didn't make evil, people did!"
c. "he wants us to have the freewill to choose between good and evil because he wants us to pick good on our own."
i'm sure thrawn's already thinking what's wrong with that! ;) well let's see....
problem with answer a: if you were omniscient and omnipotent could you not come up with a better plan? can you pace around in your heavenly bunker and watch hundreds of your priests rape kids and live with the fact that it's necessary for your big plan?
problem with answer b: are you saying that god didn't know that evil would be a biproduct of humanity when he created us? how are we capable of evil if it was not first possible? how could it be possible unless god deemed it so?
problem with c: why? he knows the outcome already anyway because he knows the future. can i change the future in a way that he can not know?
by all means keep smiling though, i wouldn't want to douse your god-buzz. there's a comfort in avoiding tough questions, i suspect that's why christianity does so well - as long as people have a saint that cares about their washing machine and another to care about their finances what more do you need?
-
It seems to me that a number of people in these threads, though stating they hate people talking to them about God, spend a great deal of time on these boards doing just that. Perhaps you really DO want those Jehova's Witness folks dropping by.
But, I love the topic. ;)
-
SLO said:
"just don't get me involved with your religion or your stats about religion....or i'll come back and show you how many wars where started cause of religion"
Wow someone else thinks like me. I've always thought religion was just good for starting wars, jealously and rebelion.
Its good to believe in something but believing in yourself, friends and family is what life is about.
to each their own.
-
Wow someone else thinks like me. I've always thought religion was just good for starting wars, jealously and rebelion.
Yeah, everyone knows "Sister Theresa" is Germanic for "she-wolf". ;)
-
Sometimes people get causes and effects backwards. While optimism and religion may be associated...
It takes an optimist to believe that some all-powerful being is eventually going to make everything in the universe right and that if you give 10% to people who claim to represent this being it gives you a shot at an everlasting life in a heaven whose existence is as well proven as the land of Oz.
Which is better: To be happy because you define the "truth" as an arbirtrary set of beliefs that makes you feel good (blissfully ignorant)? Or to be sad because you define the "truth" as a logical set of beliefs based on real observations which make you feel bad (painfully enlightened)?
Clearly, it is better to be happy, but my mind says logic and reason based on hard evidence is the best way to make decisions rather than wishful thinking. I see it as a much better bet to spend my life doing the best I can to use every moment wisely than to waste even a small fraction of it preparing for an afterlife that in all probability doesn't exist.
-
Originally posted by streakeagle
Which is better: To be happy because you define the "truth" as an arbirtrary set of beliefs that makes you feel good (blissfully ignorant)? Or to be sad because you define the "truth" as a logical set of beliefs based on real observations which make you feel bad (painfully enlightened)?
amen- interesting language.
i don't know though- as bad as it is sometimes to not a have a space daddy that cares, it's still a massive relief to just be honest about it all though isn' t it? i think so. it's worse to have nagging doubts than honest uncertainty.:)
-
Hmm, yes, so are you aware that science cannot give answers to the questions religion answer? And to make it even worse, science cannot disprove the answers given by religion.
Yes, in this area, your beloved science is a blunt weapon.
Suck it up :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
"The most striking finding, he said, is that nonreligious students "hate school" more.
I'd argue that people that are anti-establishment have problems with both religion and school. Both are institutions that exert authority over people. I think there's a third factor (dislike for authority or whatever you want to call it) that causes both nonreligion and hatred of school.
In short, there's a third factor that causes both of these. They correlate, but neither is the cause of the other.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Hmm, yes, so are you aware that science cannot give answers to the questions religion answer? And to make it even worse, science cannot disprove the answers given by religion.
Yes, in this area, your beloved science is a blunt weapon.
Suck it up :)
Hmm yes so you are aware that religion cannot give answers to the questions science answer [sic]? And to make it even worse, religion cannot disprove the answers given by science.
Yes in this area, your beloved religion is a blunt weapon
Suck it up :)
-
Ultimately your "faith" must incorporate the entire universe.
As an atheist, ultimately you believe that the entire universe had no beginning, that matter and energy are eternal, and that this mindless matter and energy at one point in time just happened to fall together under the right circumstances and sentient beings were produced.
Atheists must face the existence that their "faith" mandates. An existence where there is no ultimate purpose to his/her existence. An existence in which they are dead and buried in but a spec of time in relation to the cosmos. An existence in which nothing they do will ultimately matter at all.
Atheists must face the fact that their faith precludes any such thing as absolute morality. That morality, in all its forms, is simply man-made and has no ultimate bearing on anything. You can be a Hitler or a Stalin and it will not matter. You can be a Ted Bundy, a Pol Pot, a southern slave owner, or a mad priest during the Spanish Inquisition. You can abuse a little boy or girl, rape, pillage, steal, maim, torture, and kill all you want with no ultimate consequences because nothing is really right or wrong. All morals are man-made concepts and mean nothing and the picking and chosing of which morals you will adhere to is, at its base, a useless and empty exercise that signifies nothing.
-
I'd rather face reality than base my life on a fairy tale (complete with the cliched happy ending).
Essentially religion is about investing in a comfortable fantasy in order to give some meaning to life - essentially attacking the very human desire of wanting to know our place in the universe. Religion doesn't answer any questions. It gives them a sugar sweet gloss coat, sides-steps them and declares them answered. Ignorance is its cornerstone and was the speciality of the very people who wrote the holy books.
"Why have all the crops died leaving me with dead animals and starving children?"
"It is god's plan and we are too unworthy to understand why."
"Thank you, father."
"Bless you my son. Remember to leave an offering on your way out."
As for knowing my place in the universe. I'm a realist. I've studied alot of astrophysics and astronomy. I, like any individual, am an infinitesimally small entity, on the grand scale of things. But none of us live on this grand scale. Not even religious people. We interact with what is in our immediate vicinity, and that never even touches the smallest part of the sprawling expanse of the universe.
I guess I can sum it all up in one easy phrase: each to their own.
Suck that up. :)
-
Quantum physics theorizes that before the big bang there was some kind of "quantic foam" a state of void with non-null energy in which matter was in a potential state.
My fiancée would explain it MUCH better, since it is her field of study (Cosmology & Gravitational Waves), now if I can only persuade her to write in here...
...or I may try something more realistic, such as changing the gravitational constant of the universe...
Daniel
-
Hortlund,
Originally posted by Hortlund
Ultimately your "faith" must incorporate the entire universe.
As an atheist you must ultimately you believe that the entire universe had no beginning, that matter and energy are eternal, and that this mindless matter and energy at one point in time just happened to fall together under the right circumstances and sentient beings were produced.
Yes, yes and yes. Up until the bit "just happened to...". You're presupposing it could have 'not' happened. Why do you presuppose that. You're saying that this universe is unusual. Compared with what? Other Universes?
Like so much of this Universe, the harder you look, the harder it gets to see, and the origins and nature of the Universe are no exception. Cosomology has some very entertaining ideas but no-one professes to have an all encompassing answer. Science is endless, and an acceptance that we will never know everything (but we can die trying).
Atheists must face the existence that their "faith" mandates. An existence where there is no ultimate purpose to his/her existence. An existence in which they are dead and buried in but a spec of time in relation to the cosmos. An existence in which nothing they do will ultimately matter at all.
Up to there I'm with you almost 100% Hortlund. I am not an atheist however, and I'm not going to deny the possibility of a deity, but I am going to rely on my own senses to determine whether such a thing exists.
I really do believe that we are all tiny, insignificant specks, lasting for a split universal scale second. We arise from stardust and we return to stardust. But this makes me very appreciative of the quality and essence of life. It's limited, it's a one shot deal, make the most of it while you can.
There is no purpose to life. Life is not a 'thing' that can have purpose. Life is a property, and in general is usually quite obvious in advanced multicellular organisms like me, although is a lot less obvious in things like fungal spores.
To assume life is a 'thing' that is 'given' and that it has has a purpose is a shade of the teleological argument. Which is fine if you already happen to believe in a god, but for us ungodly wretches can hardly be expected to swallow the Watchmaker argument.
But when you say we non-believers live ...
an existence in which they are dead and buried in but a spec of time in relation to the cosmos. An existence in which nothing they do will ultimately matter at all.
You are absolutely right, but the important word is ultimately. Regardless of how you choose to define it (mortal, eschatological, final), what is also true is that we non-believers live an existence that matters VERY MUCH to each other (ourselves and fellow humans)whilst we are alive. The point of life is what we make it.
Ultimately, when the Sun consumes the Earth, I really don't believe that my life will matter to anyone that much, and why should it?
Atheists must face the fact that their faith precludes any such thing as absolute morality. That morality, in all its forms, is simply man-made and has no ultimatebearing on anything.
Right again. This can easily be shown by shifts in morality. Codes of morality abound. Morality is a tool that contributes to group behaviour, and is mostly intuited from the reactions of others during formative years. Of course morality doesn't matter ultimately, but it sure as heck is important to the people who are living together in families, habitations, cities or planets.
We are largely self policing; we don't all steal, kill, sleep around, make false accusations, worship god and mammon, worship idols etc. If we did all hell would break out and we'd all starve to death. Cooperation is key to our survival and reasonably similar moral frameworks
... You can be a Hitler or a Stalin and it will not matter. You can be a Ted Bundy, a Pol Pot, a southern slave owner, or a mad priest during the Spanish Inquisition. You can abuse a little boy or girl, rape, pillage, steal, maim, torture, and kill all you want with no ultimate consequences because nothing is really right or wrong.
Equally you can be a Mother Theresa, Alexander Fleming, Isaac Newton, Dag Hammarskjold. You can invent all the cures in the world, feed the starving, heal the sick, stop wars, and be an ace stick in AH. Ultimately it will not matter because everyone will be long dead.
The consequences should be paid whilst they are alive, and it should be by judgement of their peers. That way we can at least be certain that 'they' will be judged. Leaving it to a notional (for me - until I have positive evidence) deity could be misconstrued as 'passing the buck'.
Likewise, those heroes and examples of we hold to be 'good' humans, should be feted and accepted with their faults as examples for us to aspire to, even if only in a small personal way.
And I won't deny you that many of the world's peacemakers have and had strong religious (and not only christian) beliefs. I see the 10 commandments as a succinct distillation of rules to live by for a harmonious society. But there is nothing that would indicate to me that they are of some divine origin
You can abuse a little boy or girl, rape, pillage, steal, maim, torture, and kill all you want with no ultimate consequences because nothing is really right or wrong.
It almost sounds like you're saying there ought to be 'Ultimate Consequences' for the truly abberant maniacs who pop up with tiresome regularity.
These would be dished out by god and his minions to the people you named. I can understand and sympathise with that. It would be great if Karma was carried out too, justice of the universe and all that.
But since when is an ought an is?
To live in the hope that those b*stards will ultimately get their just desserts is to abrograte responsibility in dealing with them ourselves. Our record is poor as your list of historical horrors clearly illustrates. Why is this?
All morals are man-made concepts
That is absolutely true
...and mean nothing and the picking and chosing of which morals you will adhere to is, at its base, a useless and empty exercise that signifies nothing.
Man made morals (as opposed to morals constructed from the revealed word of god) do have a meaning, in both senses of the word.
Very obviously a moral principle that condemns the killing of another person, means precisely that - it is self evident. A man made moral code also has meaning in the sense it does have a purpose (not an ultimate purpose mind you) - to reinforce cooperative and mutually beneficial activity, and to reward it too with stronger familial and social bonds.
The further away someone is, the less likely you are to give a rats arse whether your activities are detritmental to them. Most people couldn't care less that a lot of the things they depend on, in turn depend on the wholesale exploitation of masses (literally) of people.And, if you are a moral person, you treat your family with love and understanding as much as you can.
Etymologically, morality comes from the latin mores:'The customs'.
I won't argue against a divinely inspired morality because I cannot determine whether a deity exists (or existed for that matter - nothing in the fossil record :p ).
If a deity does exist, then the problem of evil (the necessary corollary of a divine morality) is a vexing question I should like to put to them personally. (through an agent probably, since I am aware that eye contact can be fatal)
In all candour
-
wonder what the ratio is for bad/good childhood:athiest
wonder if its higher than say bad/good childhood:religious person
how ones early life experiences color their perception of a divine
my guess would be a higher percentage of non-believers had a traumatic experience early on which pointed them on their belief system path
-
Originally posted by Eagler
wonder what the ratio is for bad/good childhood:athiest
wonder if its higher than say bad/good childhood:religious person
how ones early life experiences color their perception of a divine
my guess would be a higher percentage of non-believers had a traumatic experience early on which pointed them on their belief system path
Exact opposite scenario here.
-
Originally posted by funkedup
Optimists are pessimists with prescriptions. :)
ROTFLOL!
-
Religion linked to optimism
Isn't that a tautology?
Are there any pessimistic religions?
-
Don't some religions still have the idea of "original sin"? Seems kinda pessimistic to believe that people are born in a "state of sin", and need to be "redeemed" for something they never did.
-
"my guess would be a higher percentage of non-believers had a traumatic experience early on which pointed them on their belief system path"
I put away the book of fairy tales only a few years back.
Religon is the root of all evil.
You only need to watch the news to confirm this....or meet my ex-wife. ;)
Opiate of the masses, but if you need a crutch to get through life it's no big deal to me.
-
Originally posted by popeye
Don't some religions still have the idea of "original sin"? Seems kinda pessimistic to believe that people are born in a "state of sin", and need to be "redeemed" for something they never did.
True, but then the same book says that if you take a few seconds to pray you recieve eternal life.
The primary message is "The Creator Loves You and Offers Eternal Life."
Definitely more optimistic than the atheist outlook.
-
Originally posted by funkedup
The primary message is "The Creator Loves You and Offers Eternal Life."
Call me a godless pessimist, but I have to say that sounds just like one of those "you may have already won..." mail shots to me. :D
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
As an atheist, ultimately you believe that the entire universe had no beginning, that matter and energy are eternal, and that this mindless matter and energy at one point in time just happened to fall together under the right circumstances and sentient beings were produced.
what are you talking about? why do you have to believe that the universe has no beginning? most non-christians just don't speculate about things they have no way of knowing, concentrating rather on trying to know what we can and solve the problems within our reach.
Atheists must face the existence that their "faith" mandates. An existence where there is no ultimate purpose to his/her existence. An existence in which they are dead and buried in but a spec of time in relation to the cosmos. An existence in which nothing they do will ultimately matter at all.
why should our existence have to matter? do you only keep living because you matter? if so that's sad. i was born and here i am what further reason do i need to keep living? i'm as old as the universe and will be here til the end - just in some other form. it's very nice to be a part of everything.
your view says that god created us- gave us the choice between two of his very own creations, good and evil, and if we get it wrong he tortures us for eternity. that's madness....
Atheists must face the fact that their faith precludes any such thing as absolute morality. That morality, in all its forms, is simply man-made and has no ultimate bearing on anything. You can be a Hitler or a Stalin and it will not matter. You can be a Ted Bundy, a Pol Pot, a southern slave owner, or a mad priest during the Spanish Inquisition. You can abuse a little boy or girl, rape, pillage, steal, maim, torture, and kill all you want with no ultimate consequences because nothing is really right or wrong. All morals are man-made concepts and mean nothing and the picking and chosing of which morals you will adhere to is, at its base, a useless and empty exercise that signifies nothing.
that's the best thing you could have ever said because it really puts a spotlight on how limited your thoughts are. no ultimate consequences? what do you call jail? you're at least a lawyer serving as a pro tem judge, surely you can understand that.
why do some churches allow homos or women and others don't? why did those churches believe in killing scientists in 1450 but now they don't? why do some churches permit dancing or casual clothes and others frown on it? religion is man made and just as subject to changes in the weather.
right now the church just moves around it's rapist and molestors and forgives them if the pray just right - i'd toss their tulips in jail or execute them so don't tell me about justice and morality.
to say that being a rampant immoral nut is the norm is just ignorant - the lack of absolute morality doesn't preclude a moral schema by any stretch. atheists and agnostics are just as opposed to murder and rape as anyone else. do you really think that without religion, secular law would just permit anything it likes? does it do that in secualr nations now? or before christ? of course not - that's a really weak argument
you believe that a diety created all these billions of planets and stars and potentially other life-forms but somehow he chose to concentrate on our little rock because the earth out of all the universe is special.
i mean god gave his only son for earth. do you think he gives one son per civilized planet or does he have different threats for them? or are you goig to suggest that it's unlikely that god created other civilized planets and it's just us floatin arund with god looking angrily from above?
the only son thing must have been a big thing for jews 2000 years ago - after all when all those people in sodom tried to butt-rape the disguised angels, good old lot found favor in the lord's eyes by throwing his daughters to the crowd instead. good thing they didn't ride em too hard so lot could couple with them later. a son was valuable- ya know like a goat. hmmmmm maybe that's why god wanted people to give him animal sacrifices all those years- i can really get behind a god that wants you to kill something for him and leave out to rot....
do you really think that a diety with all the universe and all of eternity would waste his time worrying about whether or not i do the right thing and love him? would you spend eternity playing petty chess games if you had the chance?
please....your god is emotional and angry and petty.....my conception of a diety would never fit into that narrow little idea. like trying to fit 10 lbs of crap into a 5 lb bag...
-
Originally posted by funkedup
True, but then the same book says that if you take a few seconds to pray you recieve eternal life.
The primary message is "The Creator Loves You and Offers Eternal Life."
Definitely more optimistic than the atheist outlook.
or eternal torture if you don't believe in him regardless of how you live your life. why is he so needy?
-
Originally posted by -dead-
Call me a godless pessimist, but I have to say that sounds just like one of those "you may have already won..." mail shots to me. :D
LOL!
-
Originally posted by mrfish
or eternal torture if you don't believe in him regardless of how you live your life. why is he so needy?
I dunno about the eternal torture part. Mostly what it says is that you will die, that your soul will die. Which is the default atheist outcome. IMHO that's what hell is: knowing one's days are numbered, that life in this world is all there is, and that when it's over, it's over.
So what Jesus offers us is a net positive. Instead of certain death, we have a chance at eternal life. How one can see that as pessimistic is beyond me.
-
Why do people keep saying you get "eternal life"? If that's the case, regardless of what you do on this planet, when you die, you still live for ever...
There's just two options, live forever minus your body in some mythical place located somewhere between the earth's surface and the stars (firmament).... or you get to live forever with your body being tortured for an eternity somewhere between the molten lava of the middle of the earth and the outer crust.
Christianity is supposedly open to interpretation (well, that's what christians keep telling me when they are stumped on fairly easy to answer questions) so how can you be expected to follow something and be rewarded for following it.. if there is no one way to follow it?
-SW
-
as christians you have to look outside of your immediate existence for moral guidance and meaning. i don't. i find meaning in just being alive - that's optimism to me. there's no devils and threats and angry gods just responsibility for all of us to take it upon ourselves to help create the kind of world we want to live in.
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Why do people keep saying you get "eternal life"?
Read the Gospels.
If that's the case, regardless of what you do on this planet, when you die, you still live for ever...
That's not what it says. The conditions for recieving eternal life are pretty clearly laid out.
so how can you be expected to follow something and be rewarded for following it.. if there is no one way to follow it?
That's an issue that the New Testament deals with. The more confusing and detailed rules are in the Old Testament, part of the laws that God created for the people of Israel. The New Testament is all about Jesus coming and replacing those old laws with a New Covenant, where Eternal Life is offered with relatively simple and clear conditions.
-
Originally posted by mrfish
as christians you have to look outside of your immediate existence for moral guidance and meaning. i don't. i find meaning in just being alive - that's optimism to me. there's no devils and threats and angry gods just responsibility for all of us to take it upon ourselves to help create the kind of world we want to live in.
That's a much better argument than your previous one.
So maybe Atheists are more optimistic in the short term but Christians are more optimistic in the extremely long term. :)
-
What are the gospels? They aren't in the bible, aren't gospels the sermons the priest says in each mass?
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
I don't own a bible, that's what I was taught in a Christian H.S.
-SW
No excuse. :)
http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p=niv+online
I'm sure teachings vary. The stuff I'm saying comes from how I read it. I'm not some kind of great Bible scholar though.
-
i can't get past what a diety would have to be like to create this world funky. it just seems like sloppy planning, poor execution and a real lack of moral fibre. i actually think their might be some kind of supreme thingy - i'm not saying there couldn't be like atheists do- but i am extremely confident it's not the one from the bible if it exists at all.
god was too brilliant and precise with things like the forces and too weak on things like suffering subjects.
the way i see it god would be way beyond all the petty stuff from the bible but i know you don't agree
oh well bong hit?:)
-
Well fish you don't have to convert right this minute. I was just trying to express how it is optimistic.
BLUGBLUBBLUGBLUGGURGLESPLASH
COUGH
HERE
:)
-
Okay, so the gospels are the bible... one in the same, just the different writings of each author.
In that case, I'm somewhat familiar with them.. and like I said, I've always heard "they're open to interpretation".
So at the church I was taken to as a kid, they told me life was eternal happiness in heaven (in the firmament) and hell was eternal torture/damnation with your body.
-SW
-
SW the Gospels are books that tell about the life of Jesus. What he said and did when he was here.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
So at the church I was taken to as a kid, they told me life was eternal happiness in heaven (in the firmament) and hell was eternal torture/damnation with your body.
Yep me too.
As a kid in Catholic church I got taught that you had to give confession to a priest and you could do good acts to help your chances of getting into heaven, etc. etc.
But actually reading the books as an adult, I got a much different message. A lot of the stuff they teach in churches is not actually in there.
Which is why a lot of people who believe in Christ are not fond of "Religion".
-
Hortland why do you keep refering to Aetheism as a faith?
And if Christians are such optimists, whats with getting crucified, flooding the world, and the day of judgement (you can't tell me an optimist came up with the plagues, disease, and 4 horsemen)? Doesn't sound very optimistic to me :D
-
Vulcan it's semantics.
By definition, Atheism is the belief that there are no gods. Atheists have faith that there are no gods.
Agnostic is the term used for those who are undecided on the subject.
-
Atheists must face the fact that their faith precludes any such thing as absolute morality. That morality, in all its forms, is simply man-made and has no ultimate bearing on anything. You can be a Hitler or a Stalin and it will not matter. You can be a Ted Bundy, a Pol Pot, a southern slave owner, or a mad priest during the Spanish Inquisition. You can abuse a little boy or girl, rape, pillage, steal, maim, torture, and kill all you want with no ultimate consequences because nothing is really right or wrong. All morals are man-made concepts and mean nothing and the picking and chosing of which morals you will adhere to is, at its base, a useless and empty exercise that signifies nothing.
As I believe it has been touched on, for evangelical Christians all Hitler, or Stalin or Ted Bundy has to do is say, "I accept the Lord Jesus Christ as my savior" some seconds before human death and all that sin is washed away. I see no morality in this, no higher ethos beyond feed my ego and be my servant. Just ask Jack Chick :)
Gun Slinger (http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0037/0037_01.asp)
wonder what the ratio is for bad/good childhood: athiest
wonder if its higher than say bad/good childhood: religious person
how ones early life experiences color their perception of a divine
my guess would be a higher percentage of non-believers had a traumatic experience early on which pointed them on their belief system path
Eagler, is it possible for you to comprehend that some people, when asked to believe in something out of blind faith, look at what they're asked to believe in, weigh the facts (or lack there of), and say: "Sorry, you would have had me from biblical times through the middle ages, but after the renaissance I need something more." Perhaps some of us didn't have the indoctrination that others had, or didn't find some gaping hole in our lives that needed filling by the sense of acceptance and community organized religion can provide. Perhaps some of us just ask more questions. For you, your beliefs make natural sense. Speaking for myself, as an agnostic, they don’t. It’s a decision I arrived at naturally, and without any childhood trauma to steer me from your vision of the right path, in a world filled with competing visions of the right path to god.
Maybe there is a god (or a demigod), maybe not. I would like to know who created god, and what god did in the timeless years before he created Earth. Maybe it's even a Christian god, though the biblical tales don't strike me with any more believability than Zeus or Odin. Maybe there is a purely scientific origin. Unfortunately, my ability to grasp things like infinity is a bit limited right now, perhaps after several million years of evolution when I grow one of those big sci-fi brains you see in the b-movies.
Until then, I was born, which makes me one of the ultimate lottery winners. The odds against my individual birth - egg and specific sperm, right month etc. are astronomical. My parents could have had another child certainly, at a different time and place, but it wouldn't have been me. And, to be born into a prosperous society instead of some 3rd world toejamhole - another major score. To be healthy - wow, pretty cool. Great friends, great family, wonderful wife, kids on the horizon - hard to complain or ask for much more. Death is a great bummer (and it’s bugged me since I first started pondering mortality in about second grade), but, it's part of the deal. No one gets out alive :) Weighed against all the positives the lack of an afterlife can be looked at as just part of the program, and becomes more acceptable.
Charon
-
How can faith be related to not believing in the existance of something for which there is no physical or logical proof of?
I do not believe <> faith.
Originally posted by funkedup
Vulcan it's semantics.
By definition, Atheism is the belief that there are no gods. Atheists have faith that there are no gods.
Agnostic is the term used for those who are undecided on the subject.
-
How can faith be related to not believing in the existance of something for which there is no physical or logical proof of?
I do not believe <> faith.
Vulcan do you:
1. Not have faith that there is a God?
or
2. Believe that there is no God?
If the answer is 1., you are an agnostic and the term faith does not apply to your belief.
If the answer is 2., you are an atheist, and faith applies.
I'm not making this stuff up BTW, common knowledge.
-
PS If you firmly believe there is no God and you can prove it then you are an Atheist but faith doesn't describe your belief. If we take faith as meaning "belief without proof", but you have proof, then you don't have faith.
In that case you are either deluded or you need to share your theorem with the rest of us because you are the greatest logician and philosopher in recorded history. Noone has ever proved conclusively that God does not exist. :)
-
OK, theoritical question for you.
A tribe exists on some lonely pacific island.
They do not know - and of course therefore believe - of the Christian 'god', and therefore are atheists. How can you call this faith there is not a god?
Its only 'faith' from the Christian perspective.
ie, you believe in god and have your 'faith'. You see my disbelief in god as 'faith'.
I see your belief in god as 'faith' as you believe in something not proven to exist. You said it your self, faith = "belief without proof" . I do not believe, if there is a god may he strike me down with lightning right now.... hmmm gee I'm still here I theres my proof.
You're stuck inside the Christian 'square' in your thinking. Its like when I get the bible-bashers, and I ask the usual questions like where is god can I see him etc. And they do the faith thing, and I do the I have no faith in something I can't see. Then they do they "ahhh but you believe in air right? and you can't see air" and I do the "well actually you can see air, see the colour of the sky? thats air refracting the suns rays, ever see your breath in the morning? thats air with moisture in it, ever see the shimmering air over a hot road... whoa thats right you see air all the time". IE, they're stuck in what they've been taught to think.
BTW, did you know atheists aren't necessarily non-religious?
-
i'd see your islanders as non-theistic which is most analagous to agnosticism.
an atheists says "i know there is no god for certain"
an agnostic says "maybe there is maybe there isn't...who cares?"
a non-theist says "what's a god?"
i think what they mean by atheism and faith is that it takes a kind of faith to say there is no god because it's improvable like a belief in god. since it's improvable it requires faith. that's why atheists are dreaming just as much as religious people (shameless plug for angosticism ;))
-
Vulcan, I must not be communicating properly. The concepts I'm trying to explain are commonly accepted by believers and nonbelievers alike. If you insist on a personal interpretation of language, you are welcome to do so, but be warned that others might not be able to understand you.
-
"BTW, did you know atheists aren't necessarily non-religious?"
I guess I am an "atheist", but only because I don't believe in the god of the Bible or that Jesus was his son on earth.
I do believe there is a higher power responsible for our being here...but what or who it may be is a mystery I will never solve.
-
Fish, take over here please.
I guess he needs someone whose thought is not limited by some "Christian square" in order to explain the English language to him. :rolleyes:
-
Yes but the when you explain to these Islanders what I a god is, odds are they might turn around and say 'thats a ridiculous idea, I don't believe you'.
Now, they are atheists. They don't believe your story about god. There still exists no definition of faith here to me.
Now before you go arguing whether they would believe you or not, I have sat down with several non-christians, and given them a brief run down on christianities beliefs, and their exact reaction was the one above. And it was a very unbiased 'this is what christians believe' in explanation, ie I didn't do a 'this story is BS' thing.
You cannot definie non-belief in something not proven to exist as faith. Therefore you cannot liberally label atheists as a 'faith'. We simply do not believe your story.
-
One of the largest religions practised in the world is at its heart atheistic. Check the definitions below, they do not preclude each other. Weazel you'd be agnostic... I think :)
a·the·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-st) n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods
re·li·gion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ljn) n.
Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
Originally posted by weazel
"BTW, did you know atheists aren't necessarily non-religious?"
I guess I am an "atheist", but only because I don't believe in the god of the Bible or that Jesus was his son on earth.
I do believe there is a higher power responsible for our being here...but what or who it may be is a mystery I will never solve.
-
a·the·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-st) n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods
- on what evidence do they deny the existence of god? how can they prove there isn't a god? if they don't have proof but hold a belief then they necessarily have faith.
if the islanders tell you "there's no god period." then they are atheists but you've changed the circumstances of your argument. in the first version they had no conception of god now they specifically deny it.
for what it's worth, both of your points are crystal clear aren't they- it's just a semantics argument.
;)
-
In 1994 I joined a 12 step program during a very nasty divorce and came to know a "higher power".
For awhile I thought it was the traditional christian god of my youth...until reality beat me over the head enough to abandon those fairy tales.
N.A. saved my life, and it's the reason why I hacked on Udie and others for smoking dope a few months back....and part of why I'm so anti-Bush as well.
As a recovering alcoholic/addict who has freely admitted my problem/disease, I cannot trust another person who has not....especially one with the power the president holds.
Life is so much simpler when you finally abandon the things that are holding you back, mine was drink & drugs, then organized religeon.
Not to say the Bible is bad as the same human problems exist today as 2000 years ago, and solutions to many contemporary problems can be found in it.
In the end dumping all three eased my load considerably, but did leave a lot of unanswered questions to ponder.
I'm leaving those questions to people smarter than me to figure out. :D
-
The difference is 'denying' god exists. Its more a question of asking for proof as opposed to denying.
Herein lies the difference, from my point of view, between describing christianity as a faith and atheism as a faith. For example, should god reveal himself (if he exists) to an atheist, then the atheist would have no trouble in believing in his existance. However flip it round, provide absolute proof to a Christian of say the source of life (say someone replicated it in lab or something) that proved beyond all doubt that god didn't exist and that life was created by some random crap happening, I guarantee you the christian will twist it in some way to suit their explanation of christianity the bible and creation (sort of like when the bible starts becoming 'don't take its meaning literally', or 6 days actually means 6 universe days which equals 6 gazillion years or something).
Atheism is not a doctrine, or set of beliefs. It is an exclusion from a set of beliefs, and therefore not a faith.
I don't like being lumped into faiths because I'm an atheist AND I'm not religious.
Originally posted by mrfish
a·the·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-st) n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods
- on what evidence do they deny the existence of god? how can they prove there isn't a god? if they don't have proof but hold a belief then they necessarily have faith.
if the islanders tell you "there's no god period." then they are atheists but you've changed the circumstances of your argument. in the first version they had no conception of god now they specifically deny it.
for what it's worth, both of your points are crystal clear aren't they- it's just a semantics argument.
;)
-
crossing the street w/out first looking both ways is also linked to optimism
-
Hehe, has anyone here ever cracked open a good text on the subject of atheism - many dictionaries rarely describe it adequately. ;) But, from what I've read, I think Vulcan is getting it right.
Atheism is commonly defined as the belief that gods don't exist, which is partially correct while also being partially uncorrect. Atheism, technically speaking, is defined as a lack of belief in the existence of gods (literally, a-theism means lack of theism).
Think of atheism as a Venn diagram with a small circle inside a large circle. The large circle encompasses what could be called 'weak' atheists, those who simply don't believe theistic claims (undecided, skeptical due to lack of supporting evidence, never introduced to the concept of god before, etc.), while the smaller inner circle is composed of 'strong' atheists, those that take it one step further - not only don't they believe in gods, but they also believe that gods do not (or cannot) exist. While there are significant philosophical differences between 'lack of belief' and 'belief in lack' for discussion and debate purposes, both are to be considered atheism.
In most philosophy texts on the subject, it's the 'weak' atheist POV that's described as the general definition of atheism in discussions, since it encompasses both the weak and strong positions. However, in most common language and in a few books on the subject, it's the strong version that's used. Some people much prefer the strong version because it's arguably easier to critique and debate against (ie, "see, atheists have faith, too") than the skeptical weak position (which does not involve anything like religious faith).
I've even come across some people who go so far as to say atheism = antitheism, although they don't support this claim well and, considering the prefixes a- and anti- alter words differently, I think they do it because of the stronger negative connotation of anti-. Some authors even promote the idea of an insidious Evil Atheist Conspiracy born out of the 'atheist worldview' which I find amusing, since atheism cannot be a complete worldview in itself, but rather one component of a worldview.
Agnosticism is often thought of as the middle ground for the undecided between theism and (strong) atheism in common language, however agnosticism technically deals with a different subject than belief in the existence of gods. Agnosticism was created by Huxley when he became frustrated with his peers (both believers and non-believers) speaking about the supernatural as though they actually had some hard knowledge of the subject. :) Agnosticism is a position on the 'knowability' of gods (an agnostic ascribes to the position that gods are unknowable to humanity), hence it is possible for an agnostic to be either an atheist or a theist. In fact, there is actually no recognized middle ground theism and atheism, since either you believe or you don't believe in the existence of gods.
Phew, that ends the lesson for today. :) For more information, read the alt.atheism FAQ, visit the Secular Web, or I could even recommend a few books to you. You'll find these sources will generally jive with what I've written here. And stay away from Ravi Zacharias and his ilk, since their books on the subject are garbage. :)
#1008
-
Originally posted by funkedup
SW the Gospels are books that tell about the life of Jesus. What he said and did when he was here.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.
You forgot Timothy.
-
I listed the canonical ones. There are a bunch of others too.
-
ok GWH then when people ask where i stand i'll just say i am an atheist - and when they ask why i can be so sure that no god exists i'll refer them to your venn diagrams and go into a long discussion about how i am actually an agnostic but since agnosticism can be grouped under atheism then actually you see i......... come on.
there are weak and strong versions of agnosticism too but having to decalre your camp each time could get irritaing couldn't it?
i think it's important to be clear since as you stated 'lack of belief' and 'belief in lack' are so extremely different. atheist and agnostic have specific meanings in the common venacular, i see no reason to abandon them unless the goal is philosphy final.;)