Is Atheism a religion? If not, what is?

[Thorgasm]

Smells like religion to me..:lol:

Cool, then will you sign my petition of tax exempt status.

 

[FluffyNinja]

People are known liars and storytellers. This is my proof.

So you're admitting to being a liar and storyteller? And you're using your earlier post as proof? Good, you're making some progress! Keep it up and I'll send you an invitation to Sunday School!:mrgreen:

 

[FluffyNinja]

A creator is not logical.

Logic, logic, logic..........like I've said before; LOGIC is sooooooooo boring. Just take a look at Mr. Spock - he had no interesting hobbies and couldn't get a girlfriend.:lol:

Sometimes thinking outside the realm of logic (ie., FAITH) is actually so much more liberating! You see, while you atheists think yourselves in circles and try to provide logical explanations for everything and spend hours, days and years trying to debunk something which you don't believe in (and, by the way, most atheists on this forum seem to be much more "pushy" with their beliefs than most Christians I know) my life is calm, peaceful and purpose driven. I don't have to question EVERYTHING. It gives me comfort holding on to the BELIEF that my entire life has meaning and direction. Atheists just seem so intolerant and angry these days! (At least the ones on this forum)

Atheism is just too inherently DEPRESSING for me. I mean, living your entire life with the belief that we just "wink out" in the end and that we are "soulless" is such a negative approach. It seems at times that the Atheistic approach is that being happy is STUPID if your happiness was a result of religious belief. It's almost as if they must go a step further and do everything within the realm of "LOGIC" to destroy that happiness.

I'm not afraid to admit that I am a Christian. I'm certainly not going to try and force my beliefs onto others. I will not try to use scripture to judge others nor to prove what God's will is. I'll not attempt to use the scripture to disprove the statements of others. I've watched other "scripture quoters" on this forum wage their little "scripture wars" and have come to the conclusion that it is an effort in futility.

Anyway, I got a bit side-tracked, but that's my take on atheism. I look at atheists like those "non-conformists" teens in school today, you know, the "Goth" kids who dress in all black and have SlipKnot and Marilyn Manson ringtones downloaded in their cellphones. Anyway, these kids try so hard to be different. Anything (like a religion) than forces them to conform is viewed as illogical, repressive and stupid. What they fail to realize is that in their extreme effort to be "DIFFERENT," they're simply acting LIKE ALL THE OTHER KIDS who are trying to be different. Non-conformity does not exist! Atheists like to view themseves as FREE-THINKERS (just look at some of the member names on this forum) not bound by the repressive, mythical and unscientific ideologies of a religion. But their one flaw is that they all end up repeating the same old words and arguments and slap each other on the back when one of them makes a "BELIEVER" look "STUPID" on one of these threads. A

Atheists would like others to believe that their minds are "FREE" to pursue science or logical thinking - most Atheists I know (certainly not all) are college kids who've changed their majors twelve times or are burned out hippies from the sixties trying to sound smart or rebellious or both. It almost seems that atheists MUST justify their "BELIEFS" by destroying the beliefs of others. Atheism is definitely a religion, just one diguised behind "LOGIC" and so-called" "FREE THINKING."

 

[justone]

It is something that has no end. It is even part of nature.

I have a feeling, that there are a lot of people, who demand from God:
1. Create such complicated, multidimensional and tricky machine as a human,
2. Provide the machine with an operating manual (the Bible), which would be as simple and clear as a manual for the their dishwasher; including the condition, that it must be equally clear both for a human with a shovel and for a human with nuclear reactor,
3. Submit all draft drawings and descriptions of the manufacturing process for their examination,-
- of course, if God really wants their seal of approval.

At the same time, as a rule, such people can’t even fix a simple dishwasher.

I am not sure what God is doing, when He is such demands from the most primitive of His creatures…. I can imagine Him laughing in satisfaction – because this looks exactly like fun He hoped for, as a Creator.

He must be having fun.

 

[Thorgasm]

So you're admitting to being a liar and storyteller? And you're using your earlier post as proof? Good, you're making some progress! Keep it up and I'll send you an invitation to Sunday School!:mrgreen:

No, I am admitting no such thing. Sunday school, that's funny. Sunday school is where I first found out that people couldn't answer my logical questions.

 

[George_Washington]

This is a statement of ignorance. Statistically atheists are higher intelligence and higher education. Normally I'd supply a link for statistics but I'm being lazy tonight.

Oh yeah? I find that to be quite a dubious claim. I would like to see these statistics. Is that why private Christian elementary schools are so highly regarded and stress math and science? Is that why so many brillant scientists and thinkers throughout the past have been theists? And just how highly intelligent are you, Mr. enlightened atheist? I can hold my own with anybody on this forum in a variety of subject matters. I believe I've proved that time and time again. You're arrogance in your belief in atheism is laughable and so are you. You know what they say about arrogant people. Look in the mirror.

 

[nkgupta80]

Oh yeah? I find that to be quite a dubious claim. I would like to see these statistics. Is that why private Christian elementary schools are so highly regarded and stress math and science? Is that why so many brillant scientists and thinkers throughout the past have been theists? And just how highly intelligent are you, Mr. enlightened atheist? I can hold my own with anybody on this forum in a variety of subject matters. I believe I've proved that time and time again. You're arrogance in your belief in atheism is laughable and so are you. You know what they say about arrogant people. Look in the mirror.

i think the idea of theists being smarter or atheists being smarter is bogus. One's belief or faith in an idea or concept as abstract as god should have no bearing on their intelligence. however, blind faith can often make a person close-minded and oblivious to certain facts and truths. This applies to both theists and atheists.

 

[Herophant]

Logic, logic, logic..........like I've said before; LOGIC is sooooooooo boring. Just take a look at Mr. Spock - he had no interesting hobbies and couldn't get a girlfriend.:lol:

Sometimes thinking outside the realm of logic (ie., FAITH) is actually so much more liberating! You see, while you atheists think yourselves in circles and try to provide logical explanations for everything and spend hours, days and years trying to debunk something which you don't believe in (and, by the way, most atheists on this forum seem to be much more "pushy" with their beliefs than most Christians I know) my life is calm, peaceful and purpose driven. I don't have to question EVERYTHING. It gives me comfort holding on to the BELIEF that my entire life has meaning and direction. Atheists just seem so intolerant and angry these days! (At least the ones on this forum)

Atheism is just too inherently DEPRESSING for me. I mean, living your entire life with the belief that we just "wink out" in the end and that we are "soulless" is such a negative approach. It seems at times that the Atheistic approach is that being happy is STUPID if your happiness was a result of religious belief. It's almost as if they must go a step further and do everything within the realm of "LOGIC" to destroy that happiness.

I'm not afraid to admit that I am a Christian. I'm certainly not going to try and force my beliefs onto others. I will not try to use scripture to judge others nor to prove what God's will is. I'll not attempt to use the scripture to disprove the statements of others. I've watched other "scripture quoters" on this forum wage their little "scripture wars" and have come to the conclusion that it is an effort in futility.

Anyway, I got a bit side-tracked, but that's my take on atheism. I look at atheists like those "non-conformists" teens in school today, you know, the "Goth" kids who dress in all black and have SlipKnot and Marilyn Manson ringtones downloaded in their cellphones. Anyway, these kids try so hard to be different. Anything (like a religion) than forces them to conform is viewed as illogical, repressive and stupid. What they fail to realize is that in their extreme effort to be "DIFFERENT," they're simply acting LIKE ALL THE OTHER KIDS who are trying to be different. Non-conformity does not exist! Atheists like to view themseves as FREE-THINKERS (just look at some of the member names on this forum) not bound by the repressive, mythical and unscientific ideologies of a religion. But their one flaw is that they all end up repeating the same old words and arguments and slap each other on the back when one of them makes a "BELIEVER" look "STUPID" on one of these threads. A

Atheists would like others to believe that their minds are "FREE" to pursue science or logical thinking - most Atheists I know (certainly not all) are college kids who've changed their majors twelve times or are burned out hippies from the sixties trying to sound smart or rebellious or both. It almost seems that atheists MUST justify their "BELIEFS" by destroying the beliefs of others. Atheism is definitely a religion, just one diguised behind "LOGIC" and so-called" "FREE THINKING."

ignorance is bliss eh?

 

[Herophant]

Logic, logic, logic..........like I've said before; LOGIC is sooooooooo boring. Just take a look at Mr. Spock - he had no interesting hobbies and couldn't get a girlfriend.:lol:

Sometimes thinking outside the realm of logic (ie., FAITH) is actually so much more liberating! You see, while you atheists think yourselves in circles and try to provide logical explanations for everything and spend hours, days and years trying to debunk something which you don't believe in (and, by the way, most atheists on this forum seem to be much more "pushy" with their beliefs than most Christians I know) my life is calm, peaceful and purpose driven. I don't have to question EVERYTHING. It gives me comfort holding on to the BELIEF that my entire life has meaning and direction. Atheists just seem so intolerant and angry these days! (At least the ones on this forum)

Atheism is just too inherently DEPRESSING for me. I mean, living your entire life with the belief that we just "wink out" in the end and that we are "soulless" is such a negative approach. It seems at times that the Atheistic approach is that being happy is STUPID if your happiness was a result of religious belief. It's almost as if they must go a step further and do everything within the realm of "LOGIC" to destroy that happiness.

I'm not afraid to admit that I am a Christian. I'm certainly not going to try and force my beliefs onto others. I will not try to use scripture to judge others nor to prove what God's will is. I'll not attempt to use the scripture to disprove the statements of others. I've watched other "scripture quoters" on this forum wage their little "scripture wars" and have come to the conclusion that it is an effort in futility.

Anyway, I got a bit side-tracked, but that's my take on atheism. I look at atheists like those "non-conformists" teens in school today, you know, the "Goth" kids who dress in all black and have SlipKnot and Marilyn Manson ringtones downloaded in their cellphones. Anyway, these kids try so hard to be different. Anything (like a religion) than forces them to conform is viewed as illogical, repressive and stupid. What they fail to realize is that in their extreme effort to be "DIFFERENT," they're simply acting LIKE ALL THE OTHER KIDS who are trying to be different. Non-conformity does not exist! Atheists like to view themseves as FREE-THINKERS (just look at some of the member names on this forum) not bound by the repressive, mythical and unscientific ideologies of a religion. But their one flaw is that they all end up repeating the same old words and arguments and slap each other on the back when one of them makes a "BELIEVER" look "STUPID" on one of these threads. A

Atheists would like others to believe that their minds are "FREE" to pursue science or logical thinking - most Atheists I know (certainly not all) are college kids who've changed their majors twelve times or are burned out hippies from the sixties trying to sound smart or rebellious or both. It almost seems that atheists MUST justify their "BELIEFS" by destroying the beliefs of others. Atheism is definitely a religion, just one diguised behind "LOGIC" and so-called" "FREE THINKING."

ignorance is bliss eh?

 

[AlbqOwl]

i think the idea of theists being smarter or atheists being smarter is bogus. One's belief or faith in an idea or concept as abstract as god should have no bearing on their intelligence. however, blind faith can often make a person close-minded and oblivious to certain facts and truths. This applies to both theists and atheists.

Well said.

I'll concede that intelligence can get in the way of faith when proof is required for belief. I do know some nonreligious, however, who are quite bright. As previously explained, I think nonreligious are quite different from atheists.

My experience with athiests, however, is that sometimes atheists are not so bright even if they possess high IQ's. They wall themselves off from all the possibilities of the unknown which makes their worlds quite limiting. The theists and even some of the nonreligious can sense/feel/envision dimensions, probabilities, and possibilities that cannot be proved with any known data. Further, many of the theists have experienced life changing encounters or evidence of God (by whatever name) and, while they cannot prove such evidence to any others, they enjoy substantial certainty.

Georgewashington's post also pointed out one of the characteristics that most often defines Atheism: it is not content to just be but seeks to justify itself by attempting to destroy the faith of others. The nonreligious are in no way concerned with nor bothered by religious symbols, mottos, art, music, prayers, or slogans and either enjoy them aesthetically or pay them no mind.

Atheists are often so bothered by these things that they seek to remove them or at least restrict them to private activity unseen by those in the public sector. And of course, the curious want to know why? Why are Atheists so bothered by religious references when the nonreligious are not?

In my opinion Atheism is a religion and one so committed to its own doctrines that it is usually intolerant of any others.

 

[Thorgasm]

Well said.

I'll concede that intelligence can get in the way of faith when proof is required for belief. I do know some nonreligious, however, who are quite bright. As previously explained, I think nonreligious are quite different from atheists.

I am guessing that your "nonreligious" people still believe in a deity or spirituality. That is what would make them quite different from an atheist. There are intelligent people in all groups, as well as idiots in these groups too.

My experience with athiests, however, is that sometimes atheists are not so bright even if they possess high IQ's.

Can't resist those subtle ad hominems can you?

They wall themselves off from all the possibilities of the unknown which makes their worlds quite limiting. The theists and even some of the nonreligious can sense/feel/envision dimensions, probabilities, and possibilities that cannot be proved with any known data. Further, many of the theists have experienced life changing encounters or evidence of God (by whatever name) and, while they cannot prove such evidence to any others, they enjoy substantial certainty.

Really, we wall ourselves off? It would seem that the atheistic scientists have come up with more possibilities than the theocrats. Oh, I love that word "certainty". We were so "certain" that Iraq had WMD's that we didn't know where they were. Talk about bastardising the meaning of a word. It seems that deists have a lower threshold for what passes as certain.

Georgewashington's post also pointed out one of the characteristics that most often defines Atheism: it is not content to just be but seeks to justify itself by attempting to destroy the faith of others. The nonreligious are in no way concerned with nor bothered by religious symbols, mottos, art, music, prayers, or slogans and either enjoy them aesthetically or pay them no mind.

We are not destroying anyone's faith. It is religious dogma that says to demonize anyone who questions superstitions and traditions. I just would like the world to make informed decisions. Most religious people don't shop around, they just go with what was indoctrinated into them. They will buy whatever they are told.

Atheists are often so bothered by these things that they seek to remove them or at least restrict them to private activity unseen by those in the public sector. And of course, the curious want to know why? Why are Atheists so bothered by religious references when the nonreligious are not?

You'll have to define your "nonreligious". The nonreligious doen't exclude those who believe in a higher power. You can display whatever belief you want in public. As long as it isn't government endorsed or payed for with tax dollars.

In my opinion Atheism is a religion and one so committed to its own doctrines that it is usually intolerant of any others.

If atheism is a religion then nonrelgious is a religion too. :rofl

 

[MrFungus420]

No. Not one single person, ever, was born an atheist.

Well, since people must be taught what religion is, and what to believe, then it only follows that before they wre taught that, they were atheists.

In fact there really is no such thing as an atheist (someone who truly does not believe in a god).

This is just a valid as if I were to state that there is really no such thing as a theist (someone who truly does believe in a god).

Everyone is drawn to something higher than themselves.

Patently false.

If it's not God it's aliens, if it's not aliens it's something else. I've been around enough "atheists" to know this. But as I said there is no such thing as a true atheist. Everyone knows there is a god, but they don't want there too be.

Again, it would be just as valid for me to claim that everyone knows that there is no god, they just want there to be.

It is extremely arrogant to make claims about what others believe (or don't believe).

 

[MrFungus420]

90+% of Americans and probably of all people everywhere believe in some form of Diety. There is a degree of empirical evidence in that.

No, there isn't. At one time virtually 100% of people believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. At one time virtually 100% of people believed that the Earth was flat. Having the majority believe does not grant validity, nor is it evidence, empirical or otherwise.

There is no reason to believe that there will be planets in other solar systems either, but there is a degree of empircal evidence to assume that.

Except, of course, they have been observed. But, other than that, you're right. :roll:

And, those who claim to have experienced God far outnumber those who have claimed to have experience naturally occurring pink-and-white pinstriped turtles.

Again, just because a lot of people believe in something doesn't make it true. It doesn't even give it validity...

The difference is that the religion of Atheism is to deny what others claim as experience purely based on the fact that they themselves have not experienced it.

Claims that can not be substantiated in any way. Kind of like the pink-and-white pinstriped turtle I saw the other day. Unfortunately, it got away and I didn't have a camera.

So which is more rational? I believe because I have experienced? Or I believe because I have not experienced?

How about to disbelieve due to a total lack of supporting evidence...

 

[AlbqOwl]

AlbqOwl said

Well said.

I'll concede that intelligence can get in the way of faith when proof is required for belief. I do know some nonreligious, however, who are quite bright. As previously explained, I think nonreligious are quite different from atheists.

IndependentThinker said:

I am guessing that your "nonreligious" people still believe in a deity or spirituality. That is what would make them quite different from an atheist. There are intelligent people in all groups, as well as idiots in these groups too.

No, nonreligious people don't believe in a deity or spirituality or at least they certainly do not concern themselves with either. These are non issues to the nonreligious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

My experience with athiests, however, is that sometimes atheists are not so bright even if they possess high IQ's

.

IndependentThinker responded

Can't resist those subtle ad hominems can you?

Keep up Sweetie. My post was in direct response to a discussion on whether more intelligent/better educated people are Atheists. And you need to put it into context.

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

They wall themselves off from all the possibilities of the unknown which makes their worlds quite limiting. The theists and even some of the nonreligious can sense/feel/envision dimensions, probabilities, and possibilities that cannot be proved with any known data. Further, many of the theists have experienced life changing encounters or evidence of God (by whatever name) and, while they cannot prove such evidence to any others, they enjoy substantial certainty.

Independent Thinker

Really, we wall ourselves off? It would seem that the atheistic scientists have come up with more possibilities than the theocrats. Oh, I love that word "certainty". We were so "certain" that Iraq had WMD's that we didn't know where they were. Talk about bastardising the meaning of a word. It seems that deists have a lower threshold for what passes as certain.

Now think about what you just said. If a Theist experiences something and says s/he experienced it, and the Atheist has had no such experience but says the Theist has not experienced it, which has the greater certainty of his/her statement?

See what I mean about 'walling yourself off' from possibilities?

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

Georgewashington's post also pointed out one of the characteristics that most often defines Atheism: it is not content to just be but seeks to justify itself by attempting to destroy the faith of others. The nonreligious are in no way concerned with nor bothered by religious symbols, mottos, art, music, prayers, or slogans and either enjoy them aesthetically or pay them no mind.

Independent Thinker writes

We are not destroying anyone's faith. It is religious dogma that says to demonize anyone who questions superstitions and traditions. I just would like the world to make informed decisions. Most religious people don't shop around, they just go with what was indoctrinated into them. They will buy whatever they are told.

No you're not destroying anyone's faith, but it doesn't stop you from trying. Just as you are doing here. You're denying the experience of the Theist and saying what they believe is just indoctrinated into them or 'will buy whatever they are told.' That's what almost all Atheist do. Nonreligious don't care what anybody else believe and certainly would not try to influence their beliefs.

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

Atheists are often so bothered by these things that they seek to remove them or at least restrict them to private activity unseen by those in the public sector. And of course, the curious want to know why? Why are Atheists so bothered by religious references when the nonreligious are not?

Independentthinker writes

You'll have to define your "nonreligious". The nonreligious doen't exclude those who believe in a higher power. You can display whatever belief you want in public. As long as it isn't government endorsed or payed for with tax dollars.

I did define the nonreligious. You elected not to see the definition.

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

In my opinion Atheism is a religion and one so committed to its own doctrines that it is usually intolerant of any others.

Independentthinker writes

If atheism is a religion then nonrelgious is a religion too.

Nope. The nonreligious neither practices a religious belief nor cares when or where anybody else practices theirs. Most Atheists not only practice theirs, but promote theirs, and attempt to deny expression of anybody else's.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

90+% of Americans and probably of all people everywhere believe in some form of Diety. There is a degree of empirical evidence in that.

Fungus writes

No, there isn't. At one time virtually 100% of people believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. At one time virtually 100% of people believed that the Earth was flat. Having the majority believe does not grant validity, nor is it evidence, empirical or otherwise.

Ah but the flat earth believers had no empirical evidence, and once their theory was tested, it was proved false. Nobody has yet been able to prove that anyone has not experience the presence and/or activity of a Deity.

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

There is no reason to believe that there will be planets in other solar systems either, but there is a degree of empircal evidence to assume that.

Fungus writes

Except of course, they have been observed. But, other than that, you’re right.

No they have not been observed. There has been phenomenon observed to cause supposition, but nobody has actually seen them. So their existence is taken on faith that is based on calculations that may or may not prove to be accurate when tested.

Fungus writes

And, those who claim to have experienced God far outnumber those who have claimed to have experience naturally occurring pink-and-white pinstriped turtles.

Again, just because a lot of people believe in something doesn't make it true. It doesn't even give it validity...

It makes it very much more probably true if they are reporting truthfully than are declarations of those who just want something not to be true. .

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

The difference is that the religion of Atheism is to deny what others claim as experience purely based on the fact that they themselves have not experienced it.

Fungus writes

Claims that can not be substantiated in any way. Kind of like the pink-and-white pinstriped turtle I saw the other day. Unfortunately, it got away and I didn't have a camera.

If I say I believe I had a tuna fish sandwich today and you say I did not, which of us has more credibility on that subject?

Originally Posted by AlbqOwl

So which is more rational? I believe because I have experienced? Or I believe because I have not experienced?

Fungus writes

How about to disbelieve due to a total lack of supporting evidence...

To disbelieve is one thing. To flat say that nothing exists for which you do not have supporting evidence is to limit yourself to the minutae of knowledge available to be known at this time. I can’t believe that a person who claims value in science would say such a thing so I’m going to think that you didn’t think through your response on that one.

 

[nkgupta80]

To disbelieve is one thing. To flat say that nothing exists for which you do not have supporting evidence is to limit yourself to the minutae of knowledge available to be known at this time. I can’t believe that a person who claims value in science would say such a thing so I’m going to think that you didn’t think through your response on that one.

i'll agree with you. Theoretical Physcists, these days, have been thinking outside the realms of observable evidence.

i was just wondering however, based on your arguments, the christian, muslim, hindu gods (objectively speaking) have no more credibility than my claim for a god that is a pink bunny rabbit that resides within all of us. Right?

i think that this debate can only go on, after we define what the definition of god is. In terms of the christian god, i am an atheist. But in terms of a general, abstract godly figure (a superconcious force, a neutral being, etc.) I'd say im agnostic.

 

[AlbqOwl]

i'll agree with you. Theoretical Physcists, these days, have been thinking outside the realms of observable evidence.

i was just wondering however, based on your arguments, the christian, muslim, hindu gods (objectively speaking) have no more credibility than my claim for a god that is a pink bunny rabbit that resides within all of us. Right?

i think that this debate can only go on, after we define what the definition of god is. In terms of the christian god, i am an atheist. But in terms of a general, abstract godly figure (a superconcious force, a neutral being, etc.) I'd say im agnostic.

This I think is a reasonable and intelligent point of view.

There will be Christians who will presume to describe who or what God is, but these are generally the more fundamentalist believers who do religion more by rote than by revelation. (This is not to say their faith is any less valid than anybody else's however.)

Most Christians I think would not presume to attempt to describe who or what God is on a belief that this would be beyond their ability to do. I mean, if humans could define God, He wouldn't be much of a God would he? Theoretically Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in the same God but know and relate different things to God. Hindus are polytheistic but most profess one supreme god who is over the many. Buddhists do not believe in a Creator/supreme authority God but have a more 'universalist' view that all of everything is 'god' and that mankind's best goal is to achieve 'nirvana' or a oneness with it. (That is a very simplified version of my understanding of Buddhism and no doubt there are some Buddhists about who will profess a different view.)

In short there is no way to identify "God' as most believers believe in God other than to believe 'He' is spirit, is not limited to mere physical realities, and that "He' has concern for His creation/humankind. Some will see him as angry and authoritarian; others as loving and forgiving; others as some combination of that and other attributes.

For me, the only way that I or anybody else can be 100% certain of the existence of God is to experience God. I further believe that experience is available to anybody who is willing to open himself/herself to the experience and accepts it 100% on God's terms and timeline.

And I finally believe there is no way I can prove all that to you or anybody else. It is God's and your prerogative to get that done.

So now I would ask you, are you bothered by the presence of religious symbols, the word "God", a religious object d' art, religion inspired music, a prayer at a football game? Or do you note these with no particular emotional response?

If you are bothered then yes, I would say you're an Atheist. If not, then I would say you are nonreligious or, if you are curious about God or willing to be convinced, then you are agnostic.

 

[hipster_19]

Atheists are taught by liberal professors that any belief in any God(s) is complete hogwash. Yet they can't prove it to be hogwash.

Excuse me, but as an atheist, I find your comment rude and ignorant. You are not an atheist, nor do you apparently know anything about us. I was raised in a Christian family, but was never forced to believe the way my parents believed. After many years of attending church and studying the Bible and other doctrine, I made the decision that organized religion is stupid and it is my own personal opinion that God does not exist. I was NOT taught by liberal professors. In fact, I attend a prominently Catholic university, where I was admitted based on my scholastic aptitude, not my religion. I do not believe in God, but do not discourage others from believing in Him. Although, I rarely experience the same treatment in return. No, I cannot prove that God didn't exist, nor can you definitively prove that He did. And, until someone can prove that He did exist and that everything in the Bible are God's words, there will always be a barrier between those who are ruled by faith, and those who are ruled by science.

 

[nkgupta80]

Atheists are taught by liberal professors that any belief in any God(s) is complete hogwash. Yet they can't prove it to be hogwash.

not true. Most of these liberal professors that you tend to hate, are the professors who teach people to look beyond their belief. These same professors can also be christian, muslim, jewish, hindu, whatever. If a person of faith can objectively understand the consequences and possibilities beyond his/her faith, and take them fully in consideration, such thinking could not only strengthen his/her own faith but give them a deeper understanding of the world around them.

 

[nkgupta80]

This I think is a reasonable and intelligent point of view.

There will be Christians who will presume to describe who or what God is, but these are generally the more fundamentalist believers who do religion more by rote than by revelation. (This is not to say their faith is any less valid than anybody else's however.)

Most Christians I think would not presume to attempt to describe who or what God is on a belief that this would be beyond their ability to do. I mean, if humans could define God, He wouldn't be much of a God would he? Theoretically Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in the same God but know and relate different things to God. Hindus are polytheistic but most profess one supreme god who is over the many. Buddhists do not believe in a Creator/supreme authority God but have a more 'universalist' view that all of everything is 'god' and that mankind's best goal is to achieve 'nirvana' or a oneness with it. (That is a very simplified version of my understanding of Buddhism and no doubt there are some Buddhists about who will profess a different view.)

In short there is no way to identify "God' as most believers believe in God other than to believe 'He' is spirit, is not limited to mere physical realities, and that "He' has concern for His creation/humankind. Some will see him as angry and authoritarian; others as loving and forgiving; others as some combination of that and other attributes.

For me, the only way that I or anybody else can be 100% certain of the existence of God is to experience God. I further believe that experience is available to anybody who is willing to open himself/herself to the experience and accepts it 100% on God's terms and timeline.

And I finally believe there is no way I can prove all that to you or anybody else. It is God's and your prerogative to get that done.

So now I would ask you, are you bothered by the presence of religious symbols, the word "God", a religious object d' art, religion inspired music, a prayer at a football game? Or do you note these with no particular emotional response?

If you are bothered then yes, I would say you're an Atheist. If not, then I would say you are nonreligious or, if you are curious about God or willing to be convinced, then you are agnostic.

i am not bothered by any of those religious symbols. I take them lightly... merely for aesthetic pleasure or moral/historical value. So i guess under your definitions i'd go along the lines of non-religious or agnostic, although those terms don't adequetly describe my views.

 

[AlbqOwl]

i am not bothered by any of those religious symbols. I take them lightly... merely for aesthetic pleasure or moral/historical value. So i guess under your definitions i'd go along the lines of non-religious or agnostic, although those terms don't adequetly describe my views.

What else is there besides believer, nonreligious or areligious, agnostic, and Atheist? You don't believe in God but it doesn't concern you in the least that others do? What you described is absolutely nonreligious. You are able to live and let live and you can live in perfect harmony with the Athiest, the other religious, and everybdoy else. That makes you a pleasant person to be around. Why would you discount that as where you are?

 

[nkgupta80]

What else is there besides believer, nonreligious or areligious, agnostic, and Atheist? You don't believe in God but it doesn't concern you in the least that others do? What you described is absolutely nonreligious. You are able to live and let live and you can live in perfect harmony with the Athiest, the other religious, and everybdoy else. That makes you a pleasant person to be around. Why would you discount that as where you are?

first of all what is the difference between nonreligious and areligious. Secondly, I don't believe in the christian god and religion. That doesn't make me nonreligious. that would make me an atheist. I am agnostic in the sense that there may or may not be some higher force out there.

 

[AlbqOwl]

first of all what is the difference between nonreligious and areligious. Secondly, I don't believe in the christian god and religion. That doesn't make me nonreligious. that would make me an atheist. I am agnostic in the sense that there may or may not be some higher force out there.

This discussion isn't related to the "Christian god" or the "Christian religion". And the fact that one does not believe in the "Christian god" does not make one an Atheist. Buddhist, Hindus, Universalists, and hundreds of other recognized religions do not believe in the the "Christian God" but they are neverthless religious and are not Atheists.

An Atheist's religion is practiced in furthering a doctrine of there being no higher force, no God, no nothing out there. Many also have an agenda to eradicate any evidence of such from the public sector. Many Atheists also work very hard to win converts by denigrating, insulting, and attempting to discredit religious faith that others hold.

In the way the English language is used, nonreligious and areligious mean exactly the same thing which is disinterest and complete unconcern about anything relgiious. If you are interested in religion and/or drawn to religious discussions, concepts, possibilities, thoughts, etc. you probably don't qualify for this camp either.

If you hold open the possibility of a higher power being out there, that definitely puts you squarely in the camp of the agnostics. These are not believers but they leave the door open. In my appreciation for logical thought, if you cannot be a believer, this is not a bad place to be.

 

[Donkey1499]

Excuse me, but as an atheist, I find your comment rude and ignorant. You are not an atheist, nor do you apparently know anything about us. I was raised in a Christian family, but was never forced to believe the way my parents believed. After many years of attending church and studying the Bible and other doctrine, I made the decision that organized religion is stupid and it is my own personal opinion that God does not exist. I was NOT taught by liberal professors. In fact, I attend a prominently Catholic university, where I was admitted based on my scholastic aptitude, not my religion. I do not believe in God, but do not discourage others from believing in Him. Although, I rarely experience the same treatment in return. No, I cannot prove that God didn't exist, nor can you definitively prove that He did. And, until someone can prove that He did exist and that everything in the Bible are God's words, there will always be a barrier between those who are ruled by faith, and those who are ruled by science.

And I find your comment that "organized religion is stupid" to be rude and ignorant. But I suppose we're even now.

 

[tryreading]

If I say I believe I had a tuna fish sandwich today and you say I did not, which of us has more credibility on that subject?

You did not have a tuna sandwich today. Please admit it!