Ask an atheist

[SwastikaPyle]

Link to original post: [drupal=3123]Ask an atheist[/drupal]



So I notice the religious threads get quite a few posts but never really seem to follow any specific discussion rules very well. There seems to be some common...misconceptions around this forum about the way atheists/agnostic/humanists tend to think and feel, and I'd be stoked to answer all of your challenges, questions, complaints, discussions, etc that have to do with religion (and our lack thereof). There's probably a ton of other atheist lurkers on this forum that I would encourage to answer as well - that is, if this thread goes anywhere beyond the 1st post, I suppose.

It should be noted that a lot of atheists do not explicitly deny the possibility of a God. Rather, they are actually agnostic-atheists, meaning that they concede that perhaps their could be some God or higher power, but until they see evidence of such a thing then they are forced to conclude that it isn't true.

This is the thread to ask WHY we appear to be such fun-destroying *******s most of the time and get a well-informed, thoughtful reply.

No locking plz?

Edit:

This is also a DISCUSSION topic. Forgot to add that. Free speech for all, don't be ashamed. But try and be civil :/

 

[Jim Morrison]

Why are you an atheist?

 

[zaneebaslave]

First of all, My thread wasnt a religious thread, it was my attempt to create peace amoungst the biggest religions (Or states of minds) on this forum. Atheists and Christians can live in peace, and in fact I had quite a few people who agreed with me and liked some of my ideas: all of which were atheist. When people started to get into a religious quarrel, I closed the thread down as to try and save the little bit of peace we had. I'm sorry you misunderstod. I love science and understand your points of view.

But it isnt helpful to make a thread trying to start a religious debate, sine it will only further fuel the fire and increase segregation.

 

[Super_Sonic8677]

As soon as a thread makes any mention about being about God or about Not being about God, it's destined to fail.

There's an edge to the way things are typed that's not apparent or existent in other types of threads, Especially on the "non-religious" side.

Someone will **** this up.

 

[ChivalRuse]

Agnostics don't believe in anything, isn't that right? Therefore, they fail worse than people who believe in the flying spaghetti monster.

I might be wrong.

I know for sure that nihilists believe in nothing.

 

[SwastikaPyle]

Why are you an atheist?

I happened to be raised in a secular home and was raised with a total blank slate. So to answer honestly, I am an atheist probably because I got lucky, geographically. I could have ended up in any number of standard middle-class religious homes, but I happened to be born in one that refused to discuss religion or politics with their children (until we were like 16+ and hungry pseudo-intellectual).

In most other families, it's likely my parents would have told me right away that Jesus/Allah was the truth, in order to burn it into my brain at a young age. This seems to be the case with about 99% of religious recruits most of the time - I say 99% because I still hold out the chance that I'll meet the 1% guy at some point in my life who has dropped his secular-skepticism because Christianity just makes the most sense, scientifically, to him. I haven't met this guy yet but I'm still holding the possibility open.

So the simple answer to this question is: Guess I just got lucky <.<

You're choice of religion is pretty much entirely up to your parents, based on whether or not they tell you (as a child) if there is a one true God or not. Obviously they have a beneficial intent here (saving their child from Hell), so that usually justifies introducing it to their offspring at an age when they're too young to challenge, question, and punch holes in it.

Why any of us are the (non-)religion we are is pretty much entirely dependent on our geography. Most of the time, we really don't have much say in the matter :/

First of all, My thread wasnt a religious thread, it was my attempt to create peace amoungst the biggest religions (Or states of minds) on this forum. Atheists and Christians can live in peace, and in fact I had quite a few people who agreed with me and liked some of my ideas: all of which were atheist. When people started to get into a religious quarrel, I closed the thread down as to try and save the little bit of peace we had. I'm sorry you misunderstod. I love science and understand your points of view.

Nobody is forced to post in any of these threads. One of the best methods in our neverending search for moral truth is to discuss-discuss-discuss. Questioning someone's beliefs is not meant as any kind of insult or declaration of war. There is no 'peace' to save here. The fact that we can talk it over with words to each other means we're already at peace.



The only thing to be afraid of is where our conclusions might lead us.

But it isnt helpful to make a thread trying to start a religious debate, sine it will only further fuel the fire and increase segregation.

This is an attitude I find particularly discouraging - the idea that some things are just a bit too sensitive to be discussed, so we shouldn't discuss them at all. The exchange and competition of ideas is the greatest weapon we have to discover moral truth. There should be nothing in the world safe from scrutiny. No religion or scientific matter should EVER be closed from questions.


ChivalRuse - Agnostics pretty much believe that the whole concept of God is unknowable and not worth studying. Stephen Colbert kind of described it best: "Agnostics are just atheists without balls."

 

[mountain_tiger]

Agnostics don't believe in anything, isn't that right? Therefore, they fail worse than people who believe in the flying spaghetti monster.

I might be wrong.

I know for sure that nihilists believe in nothing.

In the most basic sense, agnostic people are those that are unsure of whether or not they think God exists.

In most other families, it's likely my parents would have told me right away that Jesus/Allah was the truth, in order to burn it into my brain at a young age. This seems to be the case with about 99% of religious recruits most of the time - I say 99% because I still hold out the chance that I'll meet the 1% guy at some point in my life who has dropped his secular-skepticism because Christianity just makes the most sense, scientifically, to him. I haven't met this guy yet but I'm still holding the possibility open.

So the simple answer to this question is: Guess I just got lucky <.<

You're choice of religion is pretty much entirely up to your parents, based on whether or not they tell you (as a child) if there is a one true God or not. Obviously they have a beneficial intent here (saving their child from Hell), so that usually justifies introducing it to their offspring at an age when they're too young to challenge, question, and punch holes in it.

Why any of us are the (non-)religion we are is pretty much entirely dependent on our geography. Most of the time, we really don't have much say in the matter :/

I used to be a strong Christian, but I wouldn't have said that was due to my parents as such. They were Christian themselves, I got baptised and everything, but they rarely, if ever, actually discussed religion near me. I became a stronger Christian primarily to give myself a coping mechanism, and then that kind of 'grew' for a while to the point where I genuinely believed it all to be true. Ultimately, I was a much worse person back then; I didn't listen to others' points of view much, and didn't question it because it was the main thing keeping me going at the time.

Though in most cases, it does seem to be due to your parents believing it...

 

[Today]

Agnostics don't believe in anything, isn't that right? Therefore, they fail worse than people who believe in the flying spaghetti monster.

I might be wrong.

I know for sure that nihilists believe in nothing.

Agnostics don't actually have a particular belief but they do believe that there is a higher being out there.

 

[Firus]

Agnostics don't believe in anything, isn't that right? Therefore, they fail worse than people who believe in the flying spaghetti monster.

This is the kind of thing that really helps religious threads become flame wars.

A) Know what you're talking about before you make any sort of claim against a religion, or lack thereof. If you had even Wikipedia'd it, the first sentence explains that Agnostics believe that things such as god are unknowable.

B) Just because you don't agree with a religion doesn't mean it "fails".

If you might be wrong, either look it up or don't say anything.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Therefore, they fail worse than people who believe in the flying spaghetti monster.

. <---- The point


<---Your head

 

[ChivalRuse]

This is the kind of thing that really helps religious threads become flame wars.

A) Know what you're talking about before you make any sort of claim against a religion, or lack thereof. If you had even Wikipedia'd it, the first sentence explains that Agnostics believe that things such as god are unknowable.

B) Just because you don't agree with a religion doesn't mean it "fails".

If you might be wrong, either look it up or don't say anything.

I actually did look it up right after posting and regretted what I wrote but didn't feel like changing it.

But, still, all that definition tells me is what agnostics aren't (in other words, they aren't monotheists, polytheists, pantheists, and so forth). Does that mean that agnostics can have any belief so long as it's not in God, or does it mean their uncertainty as to the existence of God prevents them from adopting a faith?

 

[Falconv1.0]

Agnostics don't believe in anything, isn't that right? Therefore, they fail worse than people who believe in the flying spaghetti monster.

I might be wrong.

I know for sure that nihilists believe in nothing.

Nihilists believe there is no inherent meaning/value in anything, I don't remember that having to mean they are complete atheists.

I'd like to note that's one of hell of an ******* comment stating that they fail because they don't prescribe to any religion.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

I happened to be raised in a secular home and was raised with a total blank slate.

Everyone is born with a blank slate. Tabula Rasa amigo.

So to answer honestly, I am an atheist probably because I got lucky, geographically.

Oh maaaaaan.

Logically speaking if you're born in a secular home, then you're lucky. If not, then unlucky. i.e. if not secular then religious, spiritualist, and other forms of metaphysical belief.

I could have ended up in any number of standard middle-class religious homes, but I happened to be born in one that refused to discuss religion or politics with their children (until we were like 16+ and hungry pseudo-intellectual).

A standard middle-class home that denies discussion on real world issues and politics. Groovy. Or rather, this explains everything.

In most other families, it's likely my parents would have told me right away that Jesus/Allah was the truth, in order to burn it into my brain at a young age. This seems to be the case with about 99% of religious recruits most of the time - I say 99% because I still hold out the chance that I'll meet the 1% guy at some point in my life who has dropped his secular-skepticism because Christianity just makes the most sense, scientifically, to him. I haven't met this guy yet but I'm still holding the possibility open.

Hi. 99% of Germans are Nazis. I say 99% because I still hold out on the chance that I'll meet the 1% guy in my life who has stopped being a Nazi because Nazism just makes the most sense, scientifically, to him. I haven't met the Bill Nye the Science Nazi yet but I'm still holding that gracious 1% of unbiased opinion open. Or maybe I just don't want to make myself look like an *** but fail miserably.

So the simple answer to this question is: Guess I just got lucky <.<

I thought atheists actually suffered these days before turning away from God. No wonder they are becoming even more flamboyant than fundamentalist Christians and have to flash everyone on the street with their "scientific thought process." It's so obvious if you don't believe in God you have to believe in "science." Too bad that most proposed internet atheists leave out ideas such as: iron-sulfur world theory, natural selection, and the Miller-Urey experiment which are the basics.

You're choice of religion is pretty much entirely up to your parents, based on whether or not they tell you (as a child) if there is a one true God or not. Obviously they have a beneficial intent here (saving their child from Hell), so that usually justifies introducing it to their offspring at an age when they're too young to challenge, question, and punch holes in it.

Do you know how many denominations there are to Christianity alone? Possible around a thousand different sects that practice the belief differently: baptist, methodist, armeneist, calvinist, zwingli, seventh-day adventist, ect.

Why any of us are the (non-)religion we are is pretty much entirely dependent on our geography. Most of the time, we really don't have much say in the matter :/

Please remain that way. The internet is unfortunately populated ad majority by ignorant atheists who want to make live journal threads with the intention to flame religion.

The only thing to be afraid of is where our conclusions might lead us.

Conclusions are scary. They are conclusive which means that you've made a decision which means that you actually have decided to stop talking and actually have begun to start thinking. Hopefully.

This is an attitude I find particularly discouraging - the idea that some things are just a bit too sensitive to be discussed, so we shouldn't discuss them at all. The exchange and competition of ideas is the greatest weapon we have to discover moral truth. There should be nothing in the world safe from scrutiny. No religion or scientific matter should EVER be closed from questions.

The problem isn't censorship but with the fact that people on the internet can't accept when they are wrong and take other people's opinions into consideration. Most people don't bother reading through a thread after it hits the second page and just reads the main OP. When scientific opinions are discussed, it happens that most people ignore it and write it off as boring. The problem isn't that science cannot be discussed, but it will never be acknowledged by people and taken at face value because people only want to learn when they feel like it and choose to remain uninformed otherwise.

As nice as the last words are, it's all bullshit. The internet is largely people bullshitting and only a small sliver of that is respectable. To be honest I have a better conversation with my mom than half the conversations I have on forum boards or in college. Oh wait. My mom is a religious fanatic. She sure is deep and funny despite being unlucky for having religion.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I give the thread two more hours.

...maybe.

 

[Firus]

But, still, all that definition tells me is what agnostics aren't (in other words, they aren't monotheists, polytheists, pantheists, and so forth). Does that mean that agnostics can have any belief so long as it's not in God, or does it mean their uncertainty as to the existence of God prevents them from adopting a faith?

I said things such as god. It applies to religion in general.

And it tells you all you need to know, not just what agnostics aren't. Agnosticism isn't just a lack of a belief in god, it's the belief that we can't know about those things.

Some people, such as myself, leave it at that. There are also agnostic theists and agnostic atheists.

This post by Zero Beat is the best way to sum it up.

 

[Apollo$]

In before the mighty lock

 

[ChivalRuse]

The whole idea of gnostic versus agnostic is pretty self-contradictory if you ask me. God, by virtue of what he is, can't really be known (since you can't have the irrevocable knowledge that God exists). It follows that you can't know the contrary (that God doesn't exist). Painting things grey rather than black and white is kind of silly. You either believe God exists or you don't. To say "God might exist, but I can never know it, therefore I don't believe it" seems reasonable on the outside. The fact of the matter is, those people are making excuses for not committing one way or the other. Those people are just afraid to place themselves in a place where they're vulnerable to the gust of a challenge, where they may face ridicule and have to actually justify their belief; they're left stuck in-between, struggling for air, but unable to obtain it for lack of their own resolve to leave the place they're in.

 

[Insetick]

I wish I was raised to be religious.

I'm secular. I live by facts, math, and science because I was raised to question anything without evidence. Now, however, I've realized that science and facts can't touch the realm of ethics. Every time I come across an ethical dilemma, I'm completely lost.

The most important questions in life can't be answered. Being religious lets one put these questions aside and get on with life. I wish I was raised to be religious, because the "foolishness" of living by made up morals would be easier than living with the agony of not knowing anything about virtue.

Unfortunately, I don't know if I can ever convert from secularism.

 

[Эикельманн [РУС]]

So if Agnostic = I don't know, but I believe in a god"


What is "I believe in a god, but I don't know WHICH ONE"

?

 

[Melomaniacal]

The most important questions in life can't be answered. Being religious lets one put these questions aside and get on with life. I wish I was raised to be religious, because the "foolishness" of living by made up morals would be easier than living with the agony of not knowing anything about virtue.

What? Religion answers the question, and then tells you to change the way you live your life because of it. There is no "putting it aside."

Look, what you need is to find your own answer for the big questions. Or, you may find that there is no real answer, and you can live your life anyway. You don't need religion or science or anything to justify living with good morals. I certainly don't, and you don't either. Maybe you can find your own personal justifications for good morals and ethics. Maybe life isn't about understanding why we are here or what will happen when we are gone, but more accepting our existence as a beautiful thing, and living and loving our lives.

Maybe the big questions do not need to be answered in order for you to live a happy and complete life.

 

[The Sauce Boss]

religion/atheist threads are the worst part of the internet. they're on every ****ing website and nothing constructive ever gets done.

 

[Reaver197]

To be very strict about definitions here, agnostic simply means "cannot be known, unknown, or unknowable". Essentially, what an agnostic would say is "I don't know if there is a god, and I don't think there is anyway to prove it one way or the other". It doesn't say anything about what they would like to be true, it just simply is an admission from them that they feel they have no way to prove or vindicate holding one opinion over the other.

To give another example, I would say I'm agnostic about sentient life on other planets. There isn't any particular reason why there couldn't be sentient life elsewhere, but, at the same time, we have zero evidence for saying there is any other sentient life. Currently, neither opinion can be proved over the other, hence the agnostic stance towards this particular inquiry. It has nothing to do with what I think or want to be true, but rather just simply noting that neither statement can be conclusively validated.

 

[SwastikaPyle]

Godammit smashboards.

I spend 30 minutes carefully editing and citing a post and find that the page has apparently refreshed itself while I was gone and it's all blank :'( I don't wanna type it out all over again, ****!

 

[Firus]

The whole idea of gnostic versus agnostic is pretty self-contradictory if you ask me. God, by virtue of what he is, can't really be known (since you can't have the irrevocable knowledge that God exists). It follows that you can't know the contrary (that God doesn't exist).

Some people believe that you CAN know if god exists.

Painting things grey rather than black and white is kind of silly. You either believe God exists or you don't. To say "God might exist, but I can never know it, therefore I don't believe it" seems reasonable on the outside. The fact of the matter is, those people are making excuses for not committing one way or the other. Those people are just afraid to place themselves in a place where they're vulnerable to the gust of a challenge, where they may face ridicule and have to actually justify their belief; they're left stuck in-between, struggling for air, but unable to obtain it for lack of their own resolve to leave the place they're in.

You're absolutely right, I'm agnostic because I'm AFRAID to justify my beliefs or commit to anything. I'm making excuses.

[/sarcasm]

Seriously, do you WANT a religious flame war to ensue or do you just enjoy telling people their beliefs are stupid?

I am agnostic because I am a very logic and fact-based person. Since there are no facts either proving or disproving the existence of god or the afterlife, I stand by the idea that they're non-provable. I don't see why this makes me afraid.

I'm the last person to be afraid of being attacked or proving my beliefs/opinions, or I wouldn't openly admit that I still love Pokémon to everyone. And why would I choose my entire beliefs system based on avoiding needing to make any sort of commitment or being afraid of being attacked if I rarely even discuss religion? That's just ridiculous.

Now, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would stop attacking my beliefs.

EDIT: Ahahaha, I just realized the irony of you telling me that people are agnostic to avoid having to prove their beliefs/be attacked for their beliefs, and that's exactly what's happening here.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I am agnostic because I am a very logic and fact-based person. Since there are no facts either proving or disproving the existence of god or the afterlife, I stand by the idea that they're non-provable. I don't see why this makes me afraid.

On that note, there's no evidence to prove or disprove the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Or that heaven is merely a beer volcano and a stripper factory.

 

[Insetick]

What? Religion answers the question, and then tells you to change the way you live your life because of it. There is no "putting it aside."

Look, what you need is to find your own answer for the big questions. Or, you may find that there is no real answer, and you can live your life anyway. You don't need religion or science or anything to justify living with good morals. I certainly don't, and you don't either. Maybe you can find your own personal justifications for good morals and ethics. Maybe life isn't about understanding why we are here or what will happen when we are gone, but more accepting our existence as a beautiful thing, and living and loving our lives.

Maybe the big questions do not need to be answered in order for you to live a happy and complete life.

I meant "put aside" as in resolving an issue that shouldn't be so important so I can move on.
I've accepted that there are no answers to moral questions, so I can't justify my personal ethical code. I used to have an answer to everything: though I was often wrong or had questionable values, I at least had answers and could live happily. Now, I doubt my morals; the only answer I CAN give is "idk."

The first thoughts I had when I read your response was "How can you just 'live your life'? How do you know what life is about? How can you just exist and not know who or what you are, or whether you matter?"
I don't know how you live happily this way, but I guess it works for you. It doesn't for me, though. I (like most other people) want to believe my life has meaning. How can I be happy if I don't know if my existence has any value or purpose?

 

[ChivalRuse]

Some people believe that you CAN know if god exists.

Keyword: believe. >_<

Knowledge is only valid when it is acquired through concrete proofs and irrefutable evidence.

You're absolutely right, I'm agnostic because I'm AFRAID to justify my beliefs or commit to anything. I'm making excuses.

I am agnostic because I am a very logic and fact-based person. Since there are no facts either proving or disproving the existence of god or the afterlife, I stand by the idea that they're non-provable. I don't see why this makes me afraid.

I'm the last person to be afraid of being attacked or proving my beliefs/opinions, or I wouldn't openly admit that I still love Pokémon to everyone. And why would I choose my entire beliefs system based on avoiding needing to make any sort of commitment or being afraid of being attacked if I rarely even discuss religion? That's just ridiculous.

[/sarcasm]

When you show me you have the guts to even say what you believe instead of babbling about what you can't prove and effects rather than causes, I'll be better convinced that you didn't assume your stance due to fear and trepidation.

Seriously, do you WANT a religious flame war to ensue or do you just enjoy telling people their beliefs are stupid?

I just gave my opinion and asked a question and people responded with hostility. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word fail, but I wasn't trying to be antagonistic. People bash Christianity all the time in similarly demeaning ways, and they haven't cracked yet.

So why should we be afraid of an honest discussion?

Now, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would stop attacking my beliefs.

So are you afraid to have to defend them?

 

[Melomaniacal]

I meant "put aside" as in resolving an issue that shouldn't be so important so I can move on.
I've accepted that there are no answers to moral questions, so I can't justify my personal ethical code. I used to have an answer to everything: though I was often wrong or had questionable values, I at least had answers and could live happily. Now, I doubt my morals; the only answer I CAN give is "idk."

So you do not understand why it is that you are a good person? You don't know why you chose to not murder or steal?

The first thoughts I had when I read your response was "How can you just 'live your life'? How do you know what life is about? How can you just exist and not know who or what you are, or whether you matter?"
I don't know how you live happily this way, but I guess it works for you. It doesn't for me, though. I (like most other people) want to believe my life has meaning. How can I be happy if I don't know if my existence has any value or purpose?

How can I just live my life?
Easy, I wake up, I decide what I want to do that day, and I do it. I enjoy each day as it happens. I believe life is beautiful, and living it is meaningful in itself. That is put simply, of course.

How do I know what life is about?
Well, I think life is about living and enjoying it while you can. I don't think life is about living a certain way to ensure a happy afterlife. On that note, what is the afterlife about? What is your purpose and meaning in an afterlife? I assume it would not have any real purpose or meaning, but that wouldn't stop you from loving every second of it. I look at life the same way.

How can I just exist and not know who or what I am, or whether I matter?
I know who I am, and I know how I matter. Maybe I don't matter to the world, but I matter to my friends and family. That's a good feeling in itself.

How do I live happily this way?
I don't understand how you can't live happily this way. I don't live my life worrying that I will be sent to hell for drinking a beer. I have great friends and family who I care about, and who care about me. Yes, my life has its ups and downs, but I love my life.

How can you be happy if you don't know that your existence has meaning or purpose?
Why can't it have meaning and purpose without the idea of god or an afterlife? You don't need a higher being or the idea of a meaningless afterlife in order to live a happy and complete life. You can decide for yourself that you get personal satisfaction from being a good person. You don't need the threats of hell to make you be a good person.

 

[Falconv1.0]

ChivalRuse, I firmly believe in God but I do not belong to a religion, so I'd kinda fall under the category of agnostic, I'd really like you to stop spouting ignorance before I report your *** for trolling, this is getting ********.

We believe in a higher power but we don't claim to know everything like most religions tend to. Get over it.

 

[GwJ]

In my opinion, I believe anyone should be open to criticism of their religion at any point in time simply because of how important it is to most people. You also can't say we're attacking you're religion, because in our eyes, you're doing quite the same by rejecting it. That's how religion goes with humans.

 

[Jonas]

I meant "put aside" as in resolving an issue that shouldn't be so important so I can move on.
I've accepted that there are no answers to moral questions, so I can't justify my personal ethical code. I used to have an answer to everything: though I was often wrong or had questionable values, I at least had answers and could live happily. Now, I doubt my morals; the only answer I CAN give is "idk."

The first thoughts I had when I read your response was "How can you just 'live your life'? How do you know what life is about? How can you just exist and not know who or what you are, or whether you matter?"
I don't know how you live happily this way, but I guess it works for you. It doesn't for me, though. I (like most other people) want to believe my life has meaning. How can I be happy if I don't know if my existence has any value or purpose?

The beauty of not being told what is right or wrong is that you can think about the matter for yourself and stick to something YOU are happy with. If you discover any faults in what you've settled, you can simply re-evaluate. Doubting your own morals is better than trusting in 2000+ year old ideas of morality.

Life isn't meaningless just because nobody tells you what it is about. Life has just as much meaning as you put into it. In fact, you should take comfort in the fact that there is no pre-defined way to live your life. There is nothing you have to live up to, there are no expectations, and therefore you cannot fail or disappoint. All that matters is that you are happy with life the way you live it

 

[Firus]

Keyword: believe. >_<

Knowledge is only valid when it is acquired through concrete proofs and irrefutable evidence.

And I don't agree with those people, so why are you trying to tell me about proof and crap? I'm just saying the viewpoint exists. Just because YOU don't think it's possible to know that god exists doesn't mean other people don't, too.

When you show me you have the guts to even say what you believe instead of babbling about what you can't prove and effects rather than causes, I'll be better convinced that you didn't assume your stance due to fear and trepidation.

"Guts"? "Babbling"?

What are you talking about? I TOLD you what I believe. I BELIEVE THAT I DON'T KNOW. I believe that I don't know whether there's a god or not. Just because you like making leaps of faith and believing in things which you have no proof for doesn't mean everyone does. (I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with that, I'm merely saying that I don't like to believe things unless I have proof for them.)

Why are you ATTACKING me? You're not challenging my religion, so don't even pretend that you are. There's a difference between challenging someone and telling them that their entire beliefs system is based on fear of having to defend themselves. There's an easy solution to having to defend yourself regardless of religion: DON'T TELL ANYONE WHAT YOU BELIEVE. But obviously I would decide to believe something totally based on fear and trepidation.

Clearly someone is butthurt because they disagree with me.

I just gave my opinion and asked a question and people responded with hostility. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word fail, but I wasn't trying to be antagonistic. People bash Christianity all the time in similarly demeaning ways, and they haven't cracked yet.

So why should we be afraid of an honest discussion?

I love the hypocrisy here. You're yelling at us for "replying with hostility", whereas all you've done is respond by...

- Telling me that my religion "fails"
- Explaining that I only believe what I do because of "fear and trepidation", and I don't have "guts"
- Using completely wrong information to attack my religion and then just not feel like fixing it

So are you afraid to have to defend them?

No, I'm tired of you telling me that I'm believing a religion for the wrong reasons.

I came into this topic because you attacked MY beliefs without knowing what the hell you were talking about, not to try and debate with you the ethics of my beliefs.

 

[SwastikaPyle]

Everyone is born with a blank slate. Tabula Rasa amigo.



Oh maaaaaan.

Logically speaking if you're born in a secular home, then you're lucky. If not, then unlucky. i.e. if not secular then religious, spiritualist, and other forms of metaphysical belief.



A standard middle-class home that denies discussion on real world issues and politics. Groovy. Or rather, this explains everything.



Hi. 99% of Germans are Nazis. I say 99% because I still hold out on the chance that I'll meet the 1% guy in my life who has stopped being a Nazi because Nazism just makes the most sense, scientifically, to him. I haven't met the Bill Nye the Science Nazi yet but I'm still holding that gracious 1% of unbiased opinion open. Or maybe I just don't want to make myself look like an *** but fail miserably.



I thought atheists actually suffered these days before turning away from God. No wonder they are becoming even more flamboyant than fundamentalist Christians and have to flash everyone on the street with their "scientific thought process." It's so obvious if you don't believe in God you have to believe in "science." Too bad that most proposed internet atheists leave out ideas such as: iron-sulfur world theory, natural selection, and the Miller-Urey experiment which are the basics.



Do you know how many denominations there are to Christianity alone? Possible around a thousand different sects that practice the belief differently: baptist, methodist, armeneist, calvinist, zwingli, seventh-day adventist, ect.



Please remain that way. The internet is unfortunately populated ad majority by ignorant atheists who want to make live journal threads with the intention to flame religion.



Conclusions are scary. They are conclusive which means that you've made a decision which means that you actually have decided to stop talking and actually have begun to start thinking. Hopefully.



The problem isn't censorship but with the fact that people on the internet can't accept when they are wrong and take other people's opinions into consideration. Most people don't bother reading through a thread after it hits the second page and just reads the main OP. When scientific opinions are discussed, it happens that most people ignore it and write it off as boring. The problem isn't that science cannot be discussed, but it will never be acknowledged by people and taken at face value because people only want to learn when they feel like it and choose to remain uninformed otherwise.

As nice as the last words are, it's all bullshit. The internet is largely people bullshitting and only a small sliver of that is respectable. To be honest I have a better conversation with my mom than half the conversations I have on forum boards or in college. Oh wait. My mom is a religious fanatic. She sure is deep and funny despite being unlucky for having religion.

I originally had a much longer, well written post here but smashboards has vaporized it so I'll remake it with much weaker bulletpoints. I think most of the time what we have is a failure to communicate.

-Sorry for using the word 'lucky,' I was trying to use it as a synonym for randomness, meaning, I had no choice really but to end up the way I am because of where I was born. Getting 'lucky' was meant to be a euphemism for that, not as some belittling insult toyour mother. Apologies.

-You compare my idea that there are very few Christians that use the scientific method to determine their faith to the idea of thinking that all Germans are Nazis. I had to struggle a little while to connect these analogies.

I stated that there are very few, if any, people who have grown up without being indoctrinated into any faith...and later chose a certain organized religion because he challenged and tested the claims of each religion and determined that one of them, Islam perhaps, is the correct religion to subscribe to.

On the other hand, if we are talking about Christians who have repeatedly tried to reconcile their faith with the scientific method, I can think of boatloads of these. These are the people who are introduced to religion first, subscribe to it, than are forced to quarrel with science later on in life. For example, I debated with a guy awhile ago who regarded bacteria flagellum as proof of God's design. "They're like little outboard motors, the perfect system to get where you need to go. It was obviously designed by some higher being."

tl;dr
I have met many people who are Christian but have somewhat reconciled their faith with science

but I have never met the reverse of this - a person without faith who applied the scientific method to a religion and conceded that the religion was the correct choice.



-Science is NOT incompatible with the idea of God/higher being/other force. It IS however, incompatible with just about any organized religion you can think of. Religion carries with it the problem of being 'divine,' and every denomination you can think of swears it takes its words straight from the Almighty.

For instance, the book of Genesis states that the Earth is roughly 6,000ish years old.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/why-christians-shouldnt-accept-millions

But of course, uranium dating (not to mention fossils) show that this clearly isn't the case. The Earth is around 750,000 times that age.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-lead_dating


It is not possible to believe both of these at once, therefore you have to assume that one of them is wrong. The believer is than caught between a rock and a hard place - either your God is wrong (and thus not infallible, which opens up a whole list of new problems), or the science is wrong.

If you think that God is wrong, this could mean you'll end up in a firey everlasting torment.

However, if you think the science is wrong, well, a small percentage of humanity(about 8% I believe) might ridicule you for it, other than that though...no biggie. Which option is the believer more likely to choose?

I do not think science and organized religion are compatible because of this. Believing in one invalidates the other.


Ps. I hate debating 'freelance' too :/
I tried to john the Debate Hall but they haven't replied.

 

[Falconv1.0]

-science Is Not Incompatible With The Idea Of God/higher Being/other Force. It Is However, Incompatible With Just About Any Organized Religion You Can Think Of. Religion Carries With It The Problem Of Being 'divine,' And Every Denomination You Can Think Of Swears It Takes Its Words Straight From The Almighty.

For Instance, The Book Of Genesis States That The Earth Is Roughly 6,000ish Years Old.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/why-christians-shouldnt-accept-millions

But Of Course, Uranium Dating (not To Mention Fossils) Show That This Clearly Isn't The Case. The Earth Is Around 750,000 Times That Age.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/uranium-lead_dating

^This. So much This.

It's shocking how many people don't understand that.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Carbon dating and other methods of dating also show that rocks in newly formed structures that we have made are millions of years old.

Gah, why am I here? The OP is not nearly as understanding as zanee, nor is the conversation half as intelligent as it was in his blog. Gone.

 

[Pink Reaper]

I tried to john the Debate Hall but they haven't replied.

No johns.

That is all.

 

[kataklysm336]

The only thing to be afraid of is where our conclusions might lead us.

I stopped reading after this. Best. Quote. Ever.

 

[Mr.Freeman]

I'll be suprised if this lasts longer than 5 pages.

 

[Falconv1.0]

If you're cool like me it's not even past one page.

 

[john!]

Uh oh religion blog!

I prefer actually debating, but if we're supposed to ask questions then I'll ask you and then you can reply, I ask more, etc. Hopefully I can steer it to a conclusion.

So: what is the difference between an agnostic atheist and a pure agnostic? Which one of these requires no faith?

Keep in mind that they cannot BOTH lack faith, because then they would be the same position. By "faith" I mean any proposition that cannot be proven. There is only one set of proven propositions.