Atheist!
- Thread starter NoJo
- Start date
H
hmmnmm
Guest
Too bad there are no missionary programs of agnosticism. That's a job I think I would enjoy.
H
hmmnmm
Guest
To be fair, words on the other side deserve attention.
ex. 'pentecostal' is louder than 'evangelical'.
Luther is a nicer word than Calvin, but Calvinism has a more peppery sinister feel than Lutheran, which sounds like a word you could sit and have coffee with, and discuss things without anyone getting hurt.
edit: I meant Calvin is a nicer word than Luther.
ex. 'pentecostal' is louder than 'evangelical'.
Luther is a nicer word than Calvin, but Calvinism has a more peppery sinister feel than Lutheran, which sounds like a word you could sit and have coffee with, and discuss things without anyone getting hurt.
edit: I meant Calvin is a nicer word than Luther.
H
hmmnmm
Guest
Evangelist is decidely more aggressive than missionary.
NoJo
Happily Marred
- Joined
- May 19, 2002
- Posts
- 15,409
Some religious people claim some kind of diplomatic immunity from havings their beliefs roundly criticised.
BULL-SHIT.
Nobody's beliefs, and nobody's religion should be immune from criticism. Nobody's behaviour should shelter under the umbrella of religious sanction: From male circumcision to Creationism, from flogging for homosexuality to animal sacrifice.
If someone says to me that they sincerely believe something from the Bible, oh, I don't know: Say, that Jesus was resurrected from the dead after he was crucified, which I think is literally incredible, considering the lack of medical knowledge at the time, then either I'm going to doubt that person's sincerity or their intelligence, or their sanity.
It's a false belief. And if it were a harmless false belief, I'd just shrug my shoulders, like I do when a crazy person tells me about the atom bomb he's got hidden in his match box.
But those beliefs are far from harmless: They're just about the only thing I can think of besides patriotism that can make good people commit evil.
The message that decent Christians draw from the Bible (fewer Jews and Moslems, in my experience), is a very noble and ethically sound one: About charitable behaviour towards your enemies, kindness, respect.
That message doesn't require you to believe in God, or the crucifixion, or transubstantiation, or the Virgin birth. I see decent "Christian" behaviour all around me in people who have no truck with the miraculous.
If people could forget all the patent nonsense, there would be far less hatred in the world.
BULL-SHIT.
Nobody's beliefs, and nobody's religion should be immune from criticism. Nobody's behaviour should shelter under the umbrella of religious sanction: From male circumcision to Creationism, from flogging for homosexuality to animal sacrifice.
If someone says to me that they sincerely believe something from the Bible, oh, I don't know: Say, that Jesus was resurrected from the dead after he was crucified, which I think is literally incredible, considering the lack of medical knowledge at the time, then either I'm going to doubt that person's sincerity or their intelligence, or their sanity.
It's a false belief. And if it were a harmless false belief, I'd just shrug my shoulders, like I do when a crazy person tells me about the atom bomb he's got hidden in his match box.
But those beliefs are far from harmless: They're just about the only thing I can think of besides patriotism that can make good people commit evil.
The message that decent Christians draw from the Bible (fewer Jews and Moslems, in my experience), is a very noble and ethically sound one: About charitable behaviour towards your enemies, kindness, respect.
That message doesn't require you to believe in God, or the crucifixion, or transubstantiation, or the Virgin birth. I see decent "Christian" behaviour all around me in people who have no truck with the miraculous.
If people could forget all the patent nonsense, there would be far less hatred in the world.
Last edited:
NoJo
Happily Marred
- Joined
- May 19, 2002
- Posts
- 15,409
I recommend the two books
"The God Delusion" by Richard ("Selfish Gene") Dawkins
and "Breaking The Spell" by Dan Dennett.
Both very funny in places too.
Hopefully those two outspoken people will start the long overdue backlash against fundamentalism in America.
Dawkins, though British, specifically targets American fundamentalism throughout the book with a relentless mixture of logic, historical and scientific evidence, and more than a touch of his late freind Douglas Adams' humour, to whom the book is dedicated.
"The God Delusion" by Richard ("Selfish Gene") Dawkins
and "Breaking The Spell" by Dan Dennett.
Both very funny in places too.
Hopefully those two outspoken people will start the long overdue backlash against fundamentalism in America.
Dawkins, though British, specifically targets American fundamentalism throughout the book with a relentless mixture of logic, historical and scientific evidence, and more than a touch of his late freind Douglas Adams' humour, to whom the book is dedicated.
shereads
Sloganless
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2003
- Posts
- 19,242
Sub Joe said:
Someone suggested that if the religious want to know why athiests object so strongly to the presence of God in government, they should try this exercise:
Every time a political figure mentions God in a speech, substitute the word "Poseidon."
H
hmmnmm
Guest
One of my favorite people on the earth loves to declare to any and all and with the barest excuse, that 'there is no god', yet I do not recall him ever saying he is an atheist.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
it would be interesting to discuss those books, perhaps in another thread.
one thing is clear, however; we who have doubts are slapping each other on the back and congratulating each other for our insights.
we are 'talking past' most religious people as much as they 'talk past' us.
can there be any common ground? any dialogue?
---
PS why talk? because atheists, as 5-10 percent of the pop at most can't really get anything done, e.g. keep abortion legal. so it behooves NONbelievers to engage with at least the liberal wing of believers in many common causes for the good of all.
one thing is clear, however; we who have doubts are slapping each other on the back and congratulating each other for our insights.
we are 'talking past' most religious people as much as they 'talk past' us.
can there be any common ground? any dialogue?
---
PS why talk? because atheists, as 5-10 percent of the pop at most can't really get anything done, e.g. keep abortion legal. so it behooves NONbelievers to engage with at least the liberal wing of believers in many common causes for the good of all.
Last edited:
NoJo
Happily Marred
- Joined
- May 19, 2002
- Posts
- 15,409
In order to effect any change in concensus, it's children that should be talking about this.
Above all, they should learn the difference between fairy tales and real life, before they start waging holy wars.
What we atheists need is a charismatic martyr, preferably one who wasn't married to a strange Japanese woman
Above all, they should learn the difference between fairy tales and real life, before they start waging holy wars.
What we atheists need is a charismatic martyr, preferably one who wasn't married to a strange Japanese woman
H
hmmnmm
Guest
Sub Joe said:
As long as children are left alone to reason it through themselves as best they can with what each has to work with and both the fundamentalists and atheists refrain from prejudicial input. But really, I don't put much stock in what anyone says they believe unless or until they have reached a certain age, gathered a share of experiences and data, and they can convince me that what they have concluded they have come to on their own, rather than reading books by other humans, christian or atheist.
My dream is for each person on the earth - atheist, christian, muslim, etc... to be able to say just once, "maybe I'm wrong after all."
I'm sure I'm wrong about most things, but I continue to examine.
CharleyH
Curioser and curiouser
- Joined
- May 7, 2003
- Posts
- 16,771
Sub Joe said:
Think of the horrific implications of atheism in the phrase "America is dead in America!" LOL I think its derogatory because many Americans (not all ) believe some God has blessed their country somehow above all others and atheism goes against the god which is in America ... America.
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
[QUOTE=hmmnmm]As long as children are left alone to reason it through themselves as best they can with what each has to work with and both the fundamentalists and atheists refrain from prejudicial input. But really, I don't put much stock in what anyone says they believe unless or until they have reached a certain age, gathered a share of experiences and data, and they can convince me that what they have concluded they have come to on their own, rather than reading books by other humans, christian or atheist.
My dream is for each person on the earth - atheist, christian, muslim, etc... to be able to say just once, "maybe I'm wrong after all."
I'm sure I'm wrong about most things, but I continue to examine.[/QUOTE]
~~~~~~~
I am trying to grasp at the underlying assumptions you have made...and having a difficult time doing so.
'Truth', with a capital T, arrives in many directions. I get the feeling that you imply that if only everyone would be educated in the same manner, we would have and understand and perhaps a tolerance for differences.
There either is a God, or there is not. It would seem to me the function of the human mind is to answer that question.
Secondly, and in the first part of your statement, life is conflict and competition, is it not? Parents educate their children according to that which they judge important and valuable. There will always be opposing points of view, possessing more or less quantities of the big 'T', truth.
I think most are not comfortable with even the concept of 'absolute truth'. I think one could safely say that most of mankind much prefers to find a faith or a belief rather than take the arduous path of intellectually searching for answers.
amicus...
My dream is for each person on the earth - atheist, christian, muslim, etc... to be able to say just once, "maybe I'm wrong after all."
I'm sure I'm wrong about most things, but I continue to examine.[/QUOTE]
~~~~~~~
I am trying to grasp at the underlying assumptions you have made...and having a difficult time doing so.
'Truth', with a capital T, arrives in many directions. I get the feeling that you imply that if only everyone would be educated in the same manner, we would have and understand and perhaps a tolerance for differences.
There either is a God, or there is not. It would seem to me the function of the human mind is to answer that question.
Secondly, and in the first part of your statement, life is conflict and competition, is it not? Parents educate their children according to that which they judge important and valuable. There will always be opposing points of view, possessing more or less quantities of the big 'T', truth.
I think most are not comfortable with even the concept of 'absolute truth'. I think one could safely say that most of mankind much prefers to find a faith or a belief rather than take the arduous path of intellectually searching for answers.
amicus...
CharleyH
Curioser and curiouser
- Joined
- May 7, 2003
- Posts
- 16,771
amicus said:
This is true, Ami, but I think hmmm might be asking about why faith causes so much strife and contention, and outright ANGER. He seems to believe that only the experienced get this. I would propose that children get - anything we can believe - if not better and more clearly than any of us.
I also propose that he is saying that he is confused and wants either the religious to seriously back up their grandiose statements without biblical references and athiests to back up theirs on opinion without science or philosophical quotes?
I think he wants opinion and not anything else. But, then? Thats my interpretation. 
Last edited:
H
hmmnmm
Guest
~~~~~~~
I am trying to grasp at the underlying assumptions you have made...and having a difficult time doing so.
'Truth', with a capital T, arrives in many directions. I get the feeling that you imply that if only everyone would be educated in the same manner, we would have and understand and perhaps a tolerance for differences.
There either is a God, or there is not. It would seem to me the function of the human mind is to answer that question.
Secondly, and in the first part of your statement, life is conflict and competition, is it not? Parents educate their children according to that which they judge important and valuable. There will always be opposing points of view, possessing more or less quantities of the big 'T', truth.
I think most are not comfortable with even the concept of 'absolute truth'. I think one could safely say that most of mankind much prefers to find a faith or a belief rather than take the arduous path of intellectually searching for answers.
amicus...[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, I know the scenario I attempted to describe is very unlikely and probably not healthy. Of course, parents want their children to learn what they learned, follow in the ways they believe best for the child, maybe help them avoid a few mistakes.
And I think your last paragraph hits the bullseye, if i understand your meaning. We have a tendency to want what we are to believe handed down to us, packaged and listed, batteries included.
It's scary to venture one's mind out into the darkness of doubt.
Crap, I went blank again...
I am trying to grasp at the underlying assumptions you have made...and having a difficult time doing so.
'Truth', with a capital T, arrives in many directions. I get the feeling that you imply that if only everyone would be educated in the same manner, we would have and understand and perhaps a tolerance for differences.
There either is a God, or there is not. It would seem to me the function of the human mind is to answer that question.
Secondly, and in the first part of your statement, life is conflict and competition, is it not? Parents educate their children according to that which they judge important and valuable. There will always be opposing points of view, possessing more or less quantities of the big 'T', truth.
I think most are not comfortable with even the concept of 'absolute truth'. I think one could safely say that most of mankind much prefers to find a faith or a belief rather than take the arduous path of intellectually searching for answers.
amicus...[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, I know the scenario I attempted to describe is very unlikely and probably not healthy. Of course, parents want their children to learn what they learned, follow in the ways they believe best for the child, maybe help them avoid a few mistakes.
And I think your last paragraph hits the bullseye, if i understand your meaning. We have a tendency to want what we are to believe handed down to us, packaged and listed, batteries included.
It's scary to venture one's mind out into the darkness of doubt.
Crap, I went blank again...
amicus
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 14,812
[QUOTE=CharleyH]This is true, Ami, but I think hmmm might be asking about why faith causes so much strife and contention, and outright ANGER. He seems to believe that only the experienced get this. I would propose that children get - anything we can believe - if not better and more clearly than any of us.
I also propose that he is saying that he is confused and wants either the religious to seriously back up their grandiose statements without biblical references and athiests to back up theirs on opinion without science or philosophical quotes? I think he wants opinion and not anything else. But, then? Thats my interpretation. [/QUOTE]
~~~~
Hi, Charley....just a thought on the bold portion of your post...
Without knowledge, the mind of man is subject to doubt in beliefs. I think also the 'need' to know is fundamental in our lives and when that basic assumption, upon which all else rests, is challenged, it is almost a life threatening event and people defend their faith, to the death, if necessary, rather than be cursed with thought....as Adam and Eve were upon expulsion from the garden...recall, it was the 'fruit of knowledge' supped upon....
amicus...
I also propose that he is saying that he is confused and wants either the religious to seriously back up their grandiose statements without biblical references and athiests to back up theirs on opinion without science or philosophical quotes?
I think he wants opinion and not anything else. But, then? Thats my interpretation. [/QUOTE]~~~~
Hi, Charley....just a thought on the bold portion of your post...
Without knowledge, the mind of man is subject to doubt in beliefs. I think also the 'need' to know is fundamental in our lives and when that basic assumption, upon which all else rests, is challenged, it is almost a life threatening event and people defend their faith, to the death, if necessary, rather than be cursed with thought....as Adam and Eve were upon expulsion from the garden...recall, it was the 'fruit of knowledge' supped upon....
amicus...
H
hmmnmm
Guest
If I recall, the original question was why does the term atheist cause such negative reactions in most americans.
It was late last night when I saw that and my first reaction was that there's something about the word itself, not necessarily the definition.
After further thought, it seems to be - and I don't know why, it just is - that humans are uncomfortable without the idea of good and evil. If someone suggests that there is no god, then there must be no devil, and thus a potetial loss or at least suspension of some sort of compass or guideline. If they are able to regain their bearings (assuming they consider the potential truth of a universe not guided by a higher being), they have to find other ways to determine what is or is not good or evil.
Something like that.
I have a love/hate feeling with religion, discussing it and all.
Sorry.
Thanks.
It was late last night when I saw that and my first reaction was that there's something about the word itself, not necessarily the definition.
After further thought, it seems to be - and I don't know why, it just is - that humans are uncomfortable without the idea of good and evil. If someone suggests that there is no god, then there must be no devil, and thus a potetial loss or at least suspension of some sort of compass or guideline. If they are able to regain their bearings (assuming they consider the potential truth of a universe not guided by a higher being), they have to find other ways to determine what is or is not good or evil.
Something like that.
I have a love/hate feeling with religion, discussing it and all.
Sorry.
Thanks.
H
hmmnmm
Guest
Of course some people resist others telling them what to do or believe.
If told they MUST pray at the beginning of a school or business day, there may be in some people a reaction that says, 'fuck you, you don't have the right to force your religion down my gullet.'
On the other hand, if told they MAY NOT pray at the beginning of a school or business day, 'fuck you, here's the lord's prayer just for you.'
Mass certainty, especially when it comes to religion and especially when the masses are fed enough propaganda, and doubly especially when they are given free training in weaponry, seldoms seems to prove beneficial to anyone.
Of course I could be all wrong about all this
Still, I like the idea of being an agnostic missionary.
If told they MUST pray at the beginning of a school or business day, there may be in some people a reaction that says, 'fuck you, you don't have the right to force your religion down my gullet.'
On the other hand, if told they MAY NOT pray at the beginning of a school or business day, 'fuck you, here's the lord's prayer just for you.'
Mass certainty, especially when it comes to religion and especially when the masses are fed enough propaganda, and doubly especially when they are given free training in weaponry, seldoms seems to prove beneficial to anyone.
Of course I could be all wrong about all this
Still, I like the idea of being an agnostic missionary.
