I'm confused about this religous message...

[Skeezix]

Don't start making fun of the Mormons. They've really cleaned up their act. After all, they changed their rules and decided to let black people into heaven ...When was that? About two years ago, I think. Somebody help me out here.

[Bug]

Christianity is just another form of shammanism. I'll leave the details to your own research.

The sign was offensive to me but not because of what was said or what the author beleived but because the people who put the other religous items on display did so in a positive spirit. Whether or not they are misguided is each individual's personal choice.

 

So if the author of the sign had instead erected a replica of a famous scientific event such as a representation of evolution, it would have served the same positive purpose as the other items on display. It also would have represented a differing world view. The sign was intended to contradict what was without rather than reveal what was within.

 

As for the religious bashing on this thread so far, it represents the bad experiences of the people who posted. I respect that and wish for you that it had not been. Religion is a very dangerous thing. Equally so for Christians if Christianity as displayed in Jesus' words is a truth from a real and living God.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

 

Merry Christmas! oops. You don't beleive that Christ was born.

Happy holidays. Oops, that would be "Holy days".

Get lots of stuff!

 

[Skeezix]

As for the religious bashing on this thread so far, it represents the bad experiences of the people who posted.

 

I wasn't bashing the Mormons. I was defending them. I'm GLAD they caved and decided to let black people into heaven. It's all good.

[tvashtarkatena]

I never had a bad religious experience. I went to 8 years of Catholic school and I have to say it was pretty fun, overall.

 

Again, it's like Santa. No one really has a bad experience with Santa (Bad Santa excepted), yet everyone stops believing in him at some point. Pretty much same same for me.

[catbirdseat]

Being a scientist myself, I find it intellectually convenient to only believe in concepts that have an abundance of evidence and are scientifically testable. Atheism in my view is as much a belief system as belief in a god. I don't care to waste my time with non-belief that takes up so much energy and yet is no more testable than belief.

 

I just find it fascinating that there are a great many excellent scientists in the world that have strong religious beliefs. It seems to me that these people have to create mental partitions where one region allow myths and the other does not. The human mind is a strange thing indeed.

[tvashtarkatena]

Atheism requires exactly no energy once the atheist has taken the time and effort to consider the existence of God in an intellectually serious way. Some never bother to think about it one way or the other. By your own admission, you're not an athiest, and so it's understandable why you'd be pretty far from the mark (judging by your post) in representing that point of view...but I don't really think yours was meant to be a serious contribution to the subject anyway, but more just a need to make a little noise on the sidelines.

 

From a 'scientific' standpoint, you're primary assertion is false. There is a wealth of historical evidence indicating that today's religious doctrines are human fabrications; mainly reworked, pre-existing myths. Many strongly held Christian beliefs are not only man made, they are relatively recent in manufacture. If you'd bothered to delve into the subject prior to pontificating about it, you might have been aware of such considerations.

Edited December 6, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[Bug]

I wouldn't look to evangelicals for an original or intellectually coherent message.

friggin bible thumpers!

not the devout atheists are a whole lot better.

Both religions are completely based on fundamentally unsupportable assumptions.

 

I get this a lot, but I'm not sure I understand it. For one thing, I don't know the difference between a 'devout' atheist and an atheist. It's digital: you either are one or you're not, in the same way you either believe in Santa Claus or you don't. You may be ranting, raving atheist. You may be a quiet, unassuming, respectful atheist. But you cannot be a 'devout' atheist. You can only 'devoutly' follow a practice, and atheism is simply the absence of religious practice, not a practice in itself. There's no such thing as 'devoutly' not believing in something, although you can be sure, in your own mind, that you do not believe in something. See previous Santa Claus example. For me, there is absolutely not a shred of difference between belief in either one. In fact, I've experienced more evidence of Santa Claus than God...all those presents from Santa, etc.

 

Atheism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Atheist " redirects here. For the death metal band, see Atheist (band).

Part of a series on

Atheism

 

 

Concepts

Religion · Nontheism

Antireligion · Antitheism

Secular humanism

Metaphysical naturalism

Weak and strong atheism

Implicit and explicit atheism

 

 

History

History of atheism

 

 

Arguments

Against religion · For nontheism

Against god · Criticism

 

 

Demographics

Atheism · Irreligion

Famous atheists · State atheism

Discrimination and Persecution

 

Atheism Portal · v • d • e

Atheism, as an explicit position, can be either the affirmation of the nonexistence of gods,[1] or the rejection of theism.[2] It is also[3] defined more broadly as an absence of belief in deities, or nontheism.[4][5][6][7]

 

Many self-described atheists are skeptical of all supernatural beings and cite a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities. Others argue for atheism on philosophical, social or historical grounds. Although many self-described atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism[8] and naturalism,[9] there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere;[10] and some religions, such as Jainism and Buddhism, do not require belief in a personal god.

 

The term atheism originated as a pejorative epithet applied to any person or belief in conflict with established religion.[11][12] With the spread of freethought, scientific skepticism, and criticism of religion, the term began to gather a more specific meaning and has been increasingly used as a self-description by atheists.

 

Read Unfinished Man and the Imagination here .

It was considered the most important work of its time in the field of the philosophy of religion. Basically, it was a treatise on the proof of atheism as a logical beleif using a brilliant combination of the works of foundational western thinkers.

The author Ray L. Hart, was fired from his tenured position at Vanderbilt for publishing this book. He was an atheist for awhile there. But if you read his later books, it makes more sense as to why he became a Christian again.

I studied under him when he was an athiest at the University of Montana.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Spiritual beings? Christ, isn't the universe complicated enough already?

[STP]

Being a scientist myself, I find it intellectually convenient to only believe in concepts that have an abundance of evidence and are scientifically testable.

 

What's it mean to be a scientist? Are you just talking about science as an orthodoxy, as an established authority structure?

 

Wouldn't you rather being saying that to be a scientist requires one to push beyond the confines of the known... or are you afraid of losing your funding?

 

How do pioneers go beyond the currently accepted ideas?

It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein's proven right

Out Of Pure Light, Physicists Create Particles Of Matter

 

 

I just find it fascinating that there are a great many excellent scientists in the world that have strong religious beliefs. It seems to me that these people have to create mental partitions where one region allow myths and the other does not. The human mind is a strange thing indeed.

 

Proving that seemingly disparate concepts or conceptual approaches are not mutually exclusive. Or perhaps there is room for more synthesis.

[tvashtarkatena]

If we can understand the physical laws under which God operates, then we can become God.

 

Oh, wait....

[pink]

If we can understand the physical laws under which God operates, then we can become God.

 

Oh, wait....

[video:youtube]Xj1Xn3VB818

[STP]

Sure...Reductionism.

 

Closely related is a variety of Monism where the elemental forces or the Universe itself is equated with God.

 

Whereas the Christian in contrast, if I understand correctly, believes God to be Transcendent.

[tvashtarkatena]

Sure...Reductionism.

 

Closely related is a variety of Monism where the elemental forces or the Universe itself is equated with God.

 

Whereas the Christian in contrast, if I understand correctly, believes God to be Transcendent.

 

I just believe that the elemental forces are equated with the elemental forces, but then again, I got a D in quantum physics.

 

I'm always bewildered by the "I know there's SOMETHING out there comment." Um...yeah, there's lotsa stuff out there. Look up sometime.

[STP]

Seems you're confusing the manifestations of human institutions versus a sense of wonder and awe of the universe. The latter is prerequisite to a religious/spiritual outlook on life.

[tvashtarkatena]

Ever seen my photos? No confusion on this end.

[pink]

i can't take all this deep talk. i stopped smoking pot for this very reason.

 

 

[STP]

"The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man’s image...it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it."

"The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is the sense of the mysterious. It is the underlying principle of religion.... He who never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least blind. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is a something that our mind cannot grasp and whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection, this is religiousness....one cannot help but be in awe when (one) contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries to comprehend a little of this mystery each day. Never lose a holy curiosity."

--Albert Einstein

 

Hahaha, maybe you are right. Maybe so too, Voltaire: "If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him."

[marc_leclerc]

True Atheism does not exist. A true athieist would end their life as soon as they truly believed in Atheism. If they believed in having a good life and living life to it's fullist, then they obviously believe in something, which makes them not Atheist. You don't need to believe in a practiced religion to be non-atheist, you have a belief and thats what you live your life by. therefore you are not Atheist. the only thing that can make a true Atheist is ending their own life, if you are afraid, then you believe in something, or you are a total pussy and don't deserve to be alive to begin with. You will die and learn the truths that you made the decision to ignore while you were alive, and have to suffer extreme results thereafter. I cannot blame you for chooseing ignorance and I don't feel a true god would either, but you need to realize that people cannot comprehend nothingness for a reason -- it does not exist. And that is the only thing that does not exist - John Flaschberger

[tvashtarkatena]

Wait a minute, you actually QUOTED that?

 

Sweet Jesus....

[pink]

i got a friend named jeebus

 

[video:youtube]I9t2ZKOoT9s

[tvashtarkatena]

If you don't believe in atheism, then I guess that makes you an aatheist.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

True Atheism does not exist. A true athieist would end their life as soon as they truly believed in Atheism. If they believed in having a good life and living life to it's fullist, then they obviously believe in something, which makes them not Atheist. You don't need to believe in a practiced religion to be non-atheist, you have a belief and thats what you live your life by. therefore you are not Atheist. the only thing that can make a true Atheist is ending their own life, if you are afraid, then you believe in something, or you are a total pussy and don't deserve to be alive to begin with. You will die and learn the truths that you made the decision to ignore while you were alive, and have to suffer extreme results thereafter. I cannot blame you for chooseing ignorance and I don't feel a true god would either, but you need to realize that people cannot comprehend nothingness for a reason -- it does not exist. And that is the only thing that does not exist - John Flaschberger

 

I do have a belief...that you're an idiot. But you're young enough to get a bye for a few years.

 

Extreme results thereafter? I'm pushing 50 here...how about right fucking now?

[STP]

A person having a teleological view of history taken together with a Vedantic perspective (similar to Campbell's "Thou art that.") would come to accept that consciousness evolved so that the Universe could observe itself not merely to manipulate it but to fulfill the sense expressed in the phrase: Gnothi Seauton(similar to Buddhist idea of the Witness where the idea of boundaries between Subject and Object dissolve).

[tvashtarkatena]

A person having a teleological view of history taken together with a Vedantic perspective (similar to Campbell's "Thou art that.") would come to accept that consciousness evolved so that the Universe could observe itself not merely to manipulate it but to fulfill the sense expressed in the phrase: Gnothi Seauton(similar to Buddhist idea of the Witness where the idea of boundaries between Subject and Object dissolve).

 

What the...?

[tvashtarkatena]

Pink, pass the bong on over here.