|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 13, 2018 10:47:09 GMT
And why cannot that "something bigger" be (in the context it is used here) freedom itself ?
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 13, 2018 11:12:18 GMT
And why cannot that "something bigger" be (in the context it is used here) freedom itself ? That's a valid point. Thankfully for me I was never raised in an environment in which I was taught to believe in any particular religious belief. I believe that I was born into freedom. That is freedom as far as not getting tangled by an imaginary force is concerned. Most of us though do enslave our minds to some things. I am enslaved to ambition, desire for money/prestige and other things. However for no moment in my life I have ever believed that I can find freedom or liberation in religion.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jun 13, 2018 11:23:11 GMT
That's a valid point. Thankfully for me I was never raised in an environment in which I was taught to believe in any particular religious belief. I believe that I was born into freedom. That is freedom as far as not getting tangled by an imaginary force is concerned. Most of us though do enslave our minds to some things. I am enslaved to ambition, desire for money/prestige and other things. However for no moment in my life I have ever believed that I can find freedom or liberation in religion. Freedom So Very Misunderstood
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 13, 2018 11:48:55 GMT
There are probably as many different reasons for being an atheist as there are atheists. It can be difficult to group them into types. Stretching terms though in order to reduce the number of categories to a manageable level there are three kinds of people who believe there is no god. A fourth group "lacks" belief in a god. The definition of the fourth group is troublesome because they have traditionally been called "agnostics," and that term confuses many poorly educated people who expect the term "gnostic" to be meaningful in the modern world and the term "agnostic" to mean the opposite of that. Here Arlon is, as usual, confused. It is not necessary to believe that nothing is known, or can be known, of the existence or nature of God to merely lack a belief in God. In other words, one can lack a belief in the deliberate supernatural, be an atheist, without making any other assertions about it at all, though many, yes, might go on to make them. (The only assertion I comfortably make, for instance, is that I know that we don't know all there is about reality) But he has been reminded of this before. Presumably not even the Scottish ones. To suggest a lack of belief in the deliberate supernatural necessarily precludes an active intellectual curiosity towards the subject is peculiar. It may well be that some atheists, although they don't make any public assertions, 'in their heart of hearts' think that God most probably doesn't exist. But that's not something which can be proved, either way. And it seems a little harsh to condemn someone for the unexpressed feelings of his or her own heart. Actually, quite the opposite; it is reasonable to assert most people think god is a literal force, or entity.. an active Creator and judge, with control over the afterlife & etc, and not just an 'ethical system' with no volition. It is hard for instance to think of all those millions who pray regularly to imagine them praying to a 'system'; they might as well worship the tax code. In fact I don't know of anyone who thinks of God in the way that Arlon asserts and acts accordingly. But naturally he has his opinion and it suits him to make it. One wonders incidentally if God is 'abstract' to Arlon, using this special definition. It never appears so when he argues, as he does so often, against the standard science describing the birth of the universe, for instance. Arlon previously included "military prowess" alongside 'physical attractiveness' and 'money' amongst the "false gods" (implying there was a "real god" but one which remained mysteriously unidentified, let alone evidenced). As mentioned back then, one can stretch the notion of a 'god' to accommodate anything which suits if one weakens the definition enough - but ultimately that does not mean it is meaningful. And, as we know, down history, soldiers and generals have been much more likely to justify their wars via gods other than praising the martial service itself. There is a very long relationship between religion and the military in the United States, going back to the early days of the Army, which had chaplains funded by the Continental Congress. And again it is rather confusing to call those with a strong military calling 'atheists' when very often their regular faith can be notably traditional and strong ('no atheists in foxholes', remember?). Else military chaplains, for instance, would be under employed. In fact I remember lately there has been some controversy, in the US army at least, at the religious pressures there, where students and staff at the U.S. Naval Academy and West Point have complained of pressure from their supervisors to engage in religious activities. This definition seems contradictory and rather a misnomer, since whether or not one accepts JC as a god - and there are many on either side of the argument, which only began with John - it does not affect one's essential belief in the existence of Jehovah - which iswhat most regular definitions of theism and theists would begin with. But not so often that Arlon can link to any of these admissions, one notices... Here, at least, is something Arlon might have right; although even then there is a difference between religion and a belief in the deities they relate to. Issues with the Catholic church's abuses in the 1500's for instance did not lead to mass european atheism, but to The Reformation - and, in the following strife, fiercely-held convictions of faith was the defining characteristic of both sides for some time.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jun 13, 2018 12:33:14 GMT
A "curious" person asks questions. "There is no evidence for a god," is not a question. It is a statement (a belief) in denial of the reality that there is evidence. Lately perhaps "most people" are total idiots. "An evil and adulterous generation demands a sign," "the rain falls on the just and the unjust," and other scriptures support my view. For you perhaps. Identifying what a person actually holds supreme is the whole point of "meaningful" in this regard. Some are honest. There is a web site for military atheists. Many are not honest, they claim some god is no their side. Let's not mention which party. The concept of Jehovah is most abstract and therefore escapes definition for many people. There is a huge web site today for military atheists and Christian Atheism was a movement in higher education that began in the 60s. There are people here who might admit to being Christian atheists. goz claims she is not one, but agrees with them on most issues.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 13, 2018 14:03:00 GMT
A "curious" person asks questions. "There is no evidence for a god," is not a question. It is a statement (a belief) in denial of the reality that there is evidence. But again you only seem to be talking about what are deemed 'hard atheists' (those who go on to make positive statements about the deliberate supernatural while lacking belief). Others, like myself, are more likely to ask you 'Where is the evidence for God?' (by this I mean the regular one, not the latest 'military accomplishment' or a 'system' definition of yours) To which your conspicuous and regular lack of substantiation, outside of the claims of scripture and personal credulity, really provides its own answer. What is it you said, just lately, to me about modesty? And some substantiation for all your views would make them even more meaningful in the event. I shan't hold my breath. Indeed there is: militaryatheists.org/ But I can see why you choose not to link to it, since those founding it do not claim any worship of a 'god of military prowess' (though they may be proud of serving their country) - they rather represent people who merely lack a belief in the deliberate supernatural while serving in the forces - something quite different. If you ask people for a definition of God, then I am sure, by and large, the replies would be remarkably similar and for Christians, Jehovah would, rightly, be seen as the same thing. (It's a moot point though that, most likely, fewer would know that Jehovah is a Latinization of the Hebrew יְהֹוָה, one vocalization of the Tetragrammaton יהוה, the proper name of the God of Israel in the Hebrew Bible and one of the seven names of God in Judaism) See above: atheists in the military is not at all the same thing as that which you define as 'military atheism' That I leave between you and Goz. But, even if she agrees with your definition, this does not necessary validate the definition as anything more than a subjective definition by you.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 18:50:44 GMT
Disclaimer: The opinion mentioned in the article in no way represents my opinion and neither do I support or criticise it. I just put it here for adding additional perspective. I agree with a lot of that article. Although personally, my values/interests/tastes etc. haven't changed so much as simply broadened, become more detailed, etc. But that's not because I have a problem with the idea of change. It's just the way things have gone.
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Jun 13, 2018 20:18:20 GMT
Because it feels so good
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jun 13, 2018 22:30:53 GMT
Considering that two people voted for “angry at God”, it kind of makes you wonder if these people even know what the word atheist means. If they did, that option selection becomes illogical to the extreme.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 13, 2018 22:48:32 GMT
Considering that two people voted for “angry at God”, it kind of makes you wonder if these people even know what the word atheist means. If they did, that option selection becomes illogical to the extreme. pssssssst…{whispers} ...I think that a couple of theists possibly broke rank and answered this thread pretending to be atheists....cheeky things
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2018 2:42:15 GMT
I don't believe in any 'god' of any organized religion.
I don't because there is absolutely no reason nor need to.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jun 14, 2018 3:38:47 GMT
Well, after reading the article on 'new atheists', I have concluded that I am not a 'new atheist', I'm just a plain, old-fashioned atheist. I've never read any of the authors mentioned, I had no idea I was supposed to find something bigger than myself and devote my life to it! WTF?
I have causes I support, but they are varied, I could not choose just one. I am just trying to live my life instead of what someone else wants me to do. My early years were spent totally on god's will, whatever that was, now I choose to honor my will, which has been pushed to the end of the list for much of my life. I actually think that religion knocked out my sense of self-preservation. I really did what others needed even if it harmed me. And, surprise, it got me used, taken advantage of.
Now, my survival comes first. But I ask no-one to help me, I am as self-sufficient as I can be. I have taken on the responsibility of the welfare of some "unadoptable" pets, and they are well-fed and cared for. I'm doing all the difficult stuff for my aged mother, but not to the point where I neglect my self and my animals. If I don't take care of myself, who else will?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 14, 2018 6:15:03 GMT
Well, after reading the article on 'new atheists', I have concluded that I am not a 'new atheist', I'm just a plain, old-fashioned atheist. I've never read any of the authors mentioned, I had no idea I was supposed to find something bigger than myself and devote my life to it! WTF? I have causes I support, but they are varied, I could not choose just one. I am just trying to live my life instead of what someone else wants me to do. My early years were spent totally on god's will, whatever that was, now I choose to honor my will, which has been pushed to the end of the list for much of my life. I actually think that religion knocked out my sense of self-preservation. I really did what others needed even if it harmed me. And, surprise, it got me used, taken advantage of. Now, my survival comes first. But I ask no-one to help me, I am as self-sufficient as I can be. I have taken on the responsibility of the welfare of some "unadoptable" pets, and they are well-fed and cared for. I'm doing all the difficult stuff for my aged mother, but not to the point where I neglect my self and my animals. If I don't take care of myself, who else will? some atheists are more 'Christian' than Christians.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jun 14, 2018 6:29:55 GMT
Well, after reading the article on 'new atheists', I have concluded that I am not a 'new atheist', I'm just a plain, old-fashioned atheist. I've never read any of the authors mentioned, I had no idea I was supposed to find something bigger than myself and devote my life to it! WTF? I have causes I support, but they are varied, I could not choose just one. I am just trying to live my life instead of what someone else wants me to do. My early years were spent totally on god's will, whatever that was, now I choose to honor my will, which has been pushed to the end of the list for much of my life. I actually think that religion knocked out my sense of self-preservation. I really did what others needed even if it harmed me. And, surprise, it got me used, taken advantage of. Now, my survival comes first. But I ask no-one to help me, I am as self-sufficient as I can be. I have taken on the responsibility of the welfare of some "unadoptable" pets, and they are well-fed and cared for. I'm doing all the difficult stuff for my aged mother, but not to the point where I neglect my self and my animals. If I don't take care of myself, who else will? some atheists are more 'Christian' than Christians. I have a friend, an atheist from a young age, whose random acts of kindness would put most Christians to shame. We were traveling in the deep south of the US, and had stopped at a gas station for fuel and food. There was a young woman there, telling her friend that worked there that she was going to have to spend another night in her car, and the weather was near freezing. My friend quietly walked over to the girl and handed her enough cash for a motel room. I wouldn't have even known what she did had the cashier not mentioned this to me after my friend went out to the car. My late husband did the same kinds of things, and often he didn't even tell me what he had done.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 14, 2018 6:48:44 GMT
My early years were spent totally on god's will, whatever that was, now I choose to honor my will, which has been pushed to the end of the list for much of my life. I actually think that religion knocked out my sense of self-preservation. I really did what others needed even if it harmed me. And, surprise, it got me used, taken advantage of. Well, I am sorry to know that. This is a short life and it should not be wasted by doing things that others want you to do. I am not blaming you but our society which forces us to behave against our will or believe against our own will. I have seen in my extended family how some people's life has been dsiturbed by religion. Although there are also some happy religious people in my extended family. I might not have lived a very happy life so far but I have the satisfaction that all my choices were made by me and not by the society's or parent's pressure. I was never drawn to gods. I define myself as apatheist. It basically means a person who is simply not interested in god. I believe this is a short life and we should do everything we can to maximise our pleasure within bounds of moral principles we adhere to.
* I do have interest in religion & god as a person who is interested in why other people believe in what they believe.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jun 14, 2018 13:03:59 GMT
Because every time I've asked anybody for evidence of god's existence, their answers have lacked such evidence. Every time I've read or watched any source that claimed to have such evidence, it turned out not to. In short, the claim "god exists" has not met its burden of proof. Give me empirical evidence that your great great great great great great great great grandmother existed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2018 13:33:11 GMT
Because every time I've asked anybody for evidence of god's existence, their answers have lacked such evidence. Every time I've read or watched any source that claimed to have such evidence, it turned out not to. In short, the claim "god exists" has not met its burden of proof. Give me empirical evidence that your great great great great great great great great grandmother existed. The fact that graham exist is proof. If his great great great great great great great great grandmother did not exist neither would he.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jun 14, 2018 13:34:27 GMT
Because every time I've asked anybody for evidence of god's existence, their answers have lacked such evidence. Every time I've read or watched any source that claimed to have such evidence, it turned out not to. In short, the claim "god exists" has not met its burden of proof. Give me empirical evidence that your great great great great great great great great grandmother existed. Not quite what you're asking, but DNA evidence pretty much confirms were related to neanderthals (whether or not you'd like to admit it). In any case it's a silly comparison, we know ancient people existed (we have historical and DNA evidence), so there's no need to prove his ancestors existed since it's self evident, unless you want to argue he was artificially created in a lab or something.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jun 14, 2018 14:21:27 GMT
Technically, I don't believe there is a god. Had I been able to select a second option, I would have said that I have never experienced 'god', and that is coming from a person who grew up practically living at a Southern Baptist Church. I 'accepted Jesus as my personal Lord and Savior' at age 12 because my Sunday School teacher told me that it was time to do it. I felt nothing. A few years later, I went forward at a Billy Graham Crusade, trying to feel something. Again, nothing. I had no life outside the church except public school, and was never allowed to participate in any school activities, because I was being dragged to the church nearly every day. Until I was old enough and far enough away from my parents, I had no other reality but the church, and still felt nothing, and was starting to see the inconsistencies of the bible.When I went away to college, and I became aware of people who were NOT "washed in the blood of the lamb", a whole new world became evident. I learned about geology and biology, the historical accounts of the horrors of the Crusades and Holy Inquisition. My journey to agnostic atheism took a while, with a few detours like Buddhism, and a dash of New Ageism, but I eventually settled on logic, reason and scientific thought. The possibility of the supernatural was a real tough one to overcome, but I got there eventually. And my life is what I make it, it's my responsibility whether I thrive or fail to thrive. It is quite tragic when children are born into religious families and these beliefs are pretty much forced onto them from day one. At least you were smart enough and sharp enough to see through the inconsistencies.
I went to Sunday school and church occasionally, but I was left to my own devices to decide on what to believe. I liked the stories, but like you, they never really gelled with me as being entirely truthful, apart from being parables to express a moral in the story. I also felt like fear was being instilled into me.
Oh, yes, never underestimate the fear factor of eternal hell fire when raising children. A spanking is nothing compared to that!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2018 14:22:00 GMT
Because every time I've asked anybody for evidence of god's existence, their answers have lacked such evidence. Every time I've read or watched any source that claimed to have such evidence, it turned out not to. In short, the claim "god exists" has not met its burden of proof. Give me empirical evidence that your great great great great great great great great grandmother existed. There's plenty of empirical evidence of how human beings reproduce, is there not? If one accepts such proof, then it follows with certainty that everybody alive today had a great great great great great great great great grandmother, who would have lived a few hundred years ago. Thus it is proven. Was there some point you were trying to make there?
|
|