Tsuneo I don't understand why you debate so firmly about that. Labels may be helpful sometimes to help understanding, but they're absolutely superfluous otherwise, they don't matter.
Isn't that kind of like saying if you aren't actively in a relationship with someone of the the opposite sex then you're gay? or vice versa? I may be misunderstadning this but are you saying that if you don't actively do something your the opposite?
I'm not saying that at all. Atheism is having no belief in gods, and this whole neutral idea states that you neither believe nor disbelieve, but the moment you stop believing you become an atheist. Neutrality can't exist.
Can't say I agree with that at all but I'm also with Seha on this one... I don't understand the need to label it the way you guys are trying to lol...
Tsuneo I don't understand why you debate so firmly about that. Labels may be helpful sometimes to help understanding, but they're absolutely superfluous otherwise, they don't matter.
People think that their labels are going to save them from some imaginary hell. I'm just pointing out that it doesn't matter what you call yourself because you still lack belief regardless of of the label.
Tsuneo I don't understand why you debate so firmly about that. Labels may be helpful sometimes to help understanding, but they're absolutely superfluous otherwise, they don't matter.
People think that their labels are going to save them from some imaginary hell. I'm just pointing out that it doesn't matter what you call yourself because you still lack belief regardless of of the label.
Not really... people just beleive in something else that isn't set by a church or an ancient book... they could beleive in their hearts that something more is out there... it's not about an escape from hell or a ticket into heaven lol... The fact that you want to force them to beleive they're something else or that you even care really says something about you lol...
He's saying all people fit into 2 groups, either you believe in a god or you don't.
I'm saying people fit into 3 groups. You believe in a god, you believe that there are no gods, or you don't have an opinion either way.
The third group has no belief in god which makes it actually atheism which means there's only 2 groups.
Like I said, I find it more nuanced than that, and I think the population as a whole finds it more nuanced. Which is why there are three categories to begin with.
Isn't that kind of like saying if you aren't actively in a relationship with someone of the the opposite sex then you're gay? or vice versa? I may be misunderstadning this but are you saying that if you don't actively do something your the opposite?
I'm not saying that at all. Atheism is having no belief in gods, and this whole neutral idea states that you neither believe nor disbelieve, but the moment you stop believing you become an atheist. Neutrality can't exist.
Can't say I agree with that at all but I'm also with Seha on this one... I don't understand the need to label it the way you guys are trying to lol...
I'm just pointing out my understanding. When we have a debate we tend to talk over each other trying to get each other to agree on something we can't actually ever agree on because we're talking about two different things.
Tsuneo I don't understand why you debate so firmly about that. Labels may be helpful sometimes to help understanding, but they're absolutely superfluous otherwise, they don't matter.
People think that their labels are going to save them from some imaginary hell. I'm just pointing out that it doesn't matter what you call yourself because you still lack belief regardless of of the label.
Not really... people just beleive in something else that isn't set by a church or an ancient book... they could beleive in their hearts that something more is out there... it's not about an escape from hell or a ticket into heaven lol... The fact that you want to force them to beleive they're something else or that you even care really says something about you lol...
meh, i agree with him... I dont care if there is or isnt a god. i honestly give it no thought. if a god is proven.. fine. if something else is proven... fine. i honestly dont care. and i do believe i would be labeled an atheist for that. because i have no belief... which is what atheist can be.
Edit: and to clarify if someone asks me if i believe in god i will say no. but i wont say "no, im an atheist." i will just not really care for the question and simply answer it.
Edit: even then it was more like a journey of discovery than anything... still something I'm trying to figure out to this day really...
I think the wisest thing, in general not only religion, is never stop questioning ourselves. The moment you stop thinking is the moment you're lost.
This is the crux of many people's negative feelings towards religion.
The overwhelming majority of religious groups strongly discourage any type of questions that strike at the legitimacy of their core beliefs.
Sure there will be some exceptions, but they are not the rule.
Personally I was taught in church that questions arise from doubt and that doubt is sin. Very unhealthy.
I've talked to plenty of people who have talked to pastors (etc) who encouraged them to explore the idea. At the end of the day will the religious leader try and guide the individual in the direction of the religion? Sure, but that doesn't mean every religious leader is hostile to questions.
Since most things posted so far have been random or semantic debates, i'm not gonna feel guilty about interjecting. I love Psalm 22, a prophetic song of David (1,000 BC). It's what Jesus was referencing on the cross when he cried out "Why hast thou forsaken me?" One of my favorite parts of the Bible, hard for me to read w/o getting emotional in a good way. He has done it! Praise the Lord.
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
It may be important here to differentiate between spirituality and religion.
Edit: Kind of a pointless statement though dont you think? Of course humans are the root cause for all of humanity's problems.
He's basically saying he used his youth group minister as a guide for deciding his final faith. He said his minister was useful in understanding the bible which eventually led to his atheism.
I'm not posting this as evidence that Penn jillette is right, just that his minister was helpful in whatever direction he ended up choosing.
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
I agree... I think most people know that Religion was just a tool created to solve problems... But a tool can be used many ways and by many types of people.
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
I agree... I think most people know that Religion was just a tool created to solve problems... But a tool can be used many ways and by many types of people.
Unfortunately some tools end up breaking more than they fix.
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
This is almost 100% my view on Christianity. It's a broken tool broken by humans, because they feel the need to "do something" with it more than it was meant for.
That's why I always state specifically that I can respect, albeit disagree with, people's faith, but I am strongly opposed to the institutions and whoever acts and thinks with their flag stick up their ***.
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
Of course people are the problem because from people came the religious systems in the first place. Just look at how many flavors of Christianity we have crafted since the Protestant Reformation alone.
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
It may be important here to differentiate between spirituality and religion. Edit: Kind of a pointless statement though dont you think? Of course humans are the root cause for all of humanity's problems.
My point is that were it not religion it would be something else... Some people seem to think that the world would be rainbows and lolipos if religion were gone and fail to address the base problem... there's a lot of hate and other such "evils" in the world that have nothing to do with religion...
This is almost 100% my view on Christianity. It's a broken tool broken by humans, because they feel the need to "do something" with it more than it was meant for.
Do tell, what were humans supposed to do with Christianity? Simply believe in Jesus, ask ourselves no questions and wait till his second return?
If it weren't for the "broken tools" (Paul, Constantine and co.) trying to establish canon and spreading the belief throughout the empire the odds of us having this conversation about Christianity significantly drops.
I'm just trying to figure out when people will wake up and see that people themselves are the cause for all these problems... religion at its core it not a bad thing... People *** it up and abuse it... and others do more with it and make good use of it...
It may be important here to differentiate between spirituality and religion. Edit: Kind of a pointless statement though dont you think? Of course humans are the root cause for all of humanity's problems.
My point is that were it not religion it would be something else... Some people seem to think that the world would be rainbows and lolipos if religion were gone and fail to address the base problem... there's a lot of hate and other such "evils" in the world that have nothing to do with religion...
Anyone that thinks we would be a Utopia w/o religion is clearly a fool. We are not much evolved from the tribal groups that used to war against each other thousands of years ago.
However, it is only speculation that things would be the same if religion was gone. I think religious belief played a hugely important roll in early man and in the creation of the first civilizations, however now, I would probably say it has outlived its usefulness and that it will be difficult to move forward as a species if religion continues to play such an important roll for so many.
My point is that were it not religion it would be something else... Some people seem to think that the world would be rainbows and lolipos if religion were gone and fail to address the base problem... there's a lot of hate and other such "evils" in the world that have nothing to do with religion...
Why waste time debating what ifs? Anyone who thinks religion vanishing would lead to a utopian society is clearly delusional and not worthy of wasting time on.
It isn't that simple and it never will be.
As it stands religion has done alot of good but also has made claims about itself that has led to the suffering of millions and oppression of countless others based on no evidence other than faith.
Religion can evolve as it has in the past and that's all you can really ask of it.
I never said it didn't, in fact I said that it didn't already. wow, really comparing electricity to a "god" really? /facepalm OK Thor. I found a logical, rational way to do it. I meant the tools to use things like school to learn, aka deducting reasoning skills. (a thing religious people are trying to ban, see Texas GOP). Yes, because the subscribe to a severe level of irrationality on a regular basis, I'm claiming that their ability to think rationally is compromised, not non-existent. Yes there are, your point? and no humans are capable of being rational beings, just most are scared to. Faith is irrational and it hurts more than helps people to succeed, you can only look at the state the world is in to see that. Yes it is illogical to assume that, good thing I didn't...
Not really comparing electricity to God... comparing the point that at one time anyone bringing something like that up would be treated as a fool even though they were correct... At that time we simply did not havee the means to harness/realize it...
Insulting people gets you far Jet lol.. I fail to see how resulting to that is a logical response...
Not all religious people are trying to ban things like that and honestly, those incidents are more isolated than some make them out to be... none the less they are wrong... Many private institutions that have religious instutions actually teach our children the sciences better than many public institutions...
Compromised? What do you base this assumption off of other than your own opinion?
Faith hurts more than it helps succeed? Do you have the numbers on this or is this just another opinion? What kind of help are we talking about here as well? You make a lot of general points but fail to elaborate on any of them or give any proof to back your statements... Seems like more of a stance based on your own thoughts rather than facts... Not saying it's true or false but rather that you don't make a good argument at all... thought I'm sure you'll just tell me I'm unable to comprehend it or to do the work myself lol...
Then you haven't researched at all the history of electricity, but I understand the point you're trying to make and will simply respond with: that's why they call it science, and evidence, documented research, religion never brings forth these things.
As far as the "insulting" thing goes, you confuse labels and descriptions with insults, which comes to no surprise as you've done it for a long time, while instigating and insulting yourself.
You obviously lack a general level of paying attention to the world around you if that's what you think, because it simply isn't true, and some schools may have good divisions, it doesn't mean it's the norm.
Because by definition it does, what you're asking here is akin to asking how a hole in a hull compromises it, I don't really know how to explain it to you if you don't understand it, sorry.
By observing the world around me, and realizing that people as a whole in society lack severe deductive reasoning abilities, observation isn't really that hard man.
Religion should always be a choice though... it is your own personal journey and should never be forced upon you... Just like most things in life... There should be freedom to choose but there are times when things are forced upon us and religion is not the only one to do this... not at all excusing its use though... just to make that clear...
People aren't given the choice because if we let adults decide about religion without a childhood of indoctrination, religion would be dead before I am planted in the ground.
Just because I don't believe in some/certain gods, doesn't mean I don't believe in any. Even if you are correct and I am technically an atheist (which I'm not agreeing to) your reasoning is still flawed.
Even the most stridently religious of you is an atheist towards Ra, the Sun God. You're atheist about Quetzalcoatl, Athena, Saturn, Zeus, Odin, or any other of the thousands and millions of gods and goddesses who have come and gone throughout human history.
And you don't give them a single waking moment of thought or careful contemplation to their non-existence. You do not engage in "the religion of not believing in Imahmana Viracocha." There are no weekly meetings. There's no political movement. You just don't give it any consideration whatsoever.
Atheists are precisely the same way -- they just add one more god to the list.
Not even Christopher Hitchens (the most publicly virulent anti-religious person I can recall offhand) wants to outlaw religion, nor would consider a religious person an impossibly flawed, evil being who does not deserve to hold elected office or be invited into one's house. He just wants religion to leave him alone.
Yet the stigma against atheists in our society is so strong, publicly proclaiming yourself to be one is akin to proclaiming yourself an agent of Lucifer. It is impossible to achieve any elected office in this country after such a pronouncement. Many studies have shown that the hatred towards atheists in this country is more widespread and vitriolic than even the hatred towards militant Islam.
So please, don't equate the two.
Your reasoning is still flawed.
By the way, congrats on somehow managing to take an entire post out of context and use it for your argument.
I'm atheist towards some gods, not all.
Quote:
agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively
I don't, and have never, claimed all gods to be non-existent. Which means simply, agnostic fits me better than atheist. For me to (correctly) identify as an atheist over agnostic, I need to disbelieve that any and all gods/deities exist. You can try and argue this until you're blue in the face, it doesn't change anything.
never said you did nor didn't, but again, definition is wrong.
If you have an expressed belief in a deity, then you sir are a theist, belief has nothing to do with gnosticism/agnosticism.
If you don't hold an expressed belief in a deity, then you sir are an atheist, lack of belief still has nothing to do with gnosticism/agnosticism.
Technically everyone is agnostic, nobody knows, but those who claim they do would be haphazardly considered gnostic.
If you believe in some gods, you're a theist. I don't know why it's hard to grasp that you're either theist or atheist. Also that popular stance on agnosticism is a bunch of ***.
Did I say I believe in a god?
Both of you (you and Jet) are too caught up in making assumptions of people just because it fits/"strengthens" your argument.
I don't know why it's so hard to grasp that you can actually be neutral. I don't have to entirely believe or entirely disbelieve. For instance, I can disbelieve in the Christian god, but also accept the fact that there might be a deity out there, that I simply don't know.
we're not making assumptions, you just confuse your own words, and don't realize that it has nothing to do with if you do or don't know.
