Religions

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Surely the default position of science is "we don't know", ergo agnosticism.

 

Initially, yes, but as we investigate, we find that according to our current understanding of the universe, nothing points to there being a creator or god, hence there is no reason to believe it at this point. We can't be absolutely certain, of course, just like we can't be absolutely certain there aren't unicorns in remote parts of certain German forests, but there is zero evidence for it and thus zero reason to believe it.

[MoogleViper]

Initially, yes, but as we investigate, we find that according to our current understanding of the universe, nothing points to there being a creator or god, hence there is no reason to believe it at this point. We can't be absolutely certain, of course, just like we can't be absolutely certain there aren't unicorns in remote parts of certain German forests, but there is zero evidence for it and thus zero reason to believe it.

 

But atheism is an absolute position. You can still be agnostic and not believe in a god, merely accept the possibility.

 

I also find so many people to be incredibly narrow minded towards the concept of god, always viewing it as some sort of powerful human. A conversion I've had with my dad:

Him: "If god exists, he must be evil?"

Me: "Why?"

"well why would he create evil and let evil happen?"

"Why do you assume god must be a "he"?"

"You're saying it could be a woman?"

"No, why do you view him as some sort of sentient being who watches over our every move? God could be a force of the universe, or he may not have anything to do with us, or he may have created the universe, and then isn't even aware of us, similar to how we aren't aware of bacteria and other micro-organisms. God could be anything, can you not imagine him as anything other than a powerful human?"

"... but he must be evil."

 

EDIT: Also we don't have any evidence for aliens, but most scientists believe in them.

Edited September 26, 2012 by MoogleViper

[Zell]

But atheism is an absolute position. You can still be agnostic and not believe in a god, merely accept the possibility.

 

Not quite. Atheists disbelieve in the supernatural, whereas agnostics neither believe or disbelieve. If you do not believe in a god but merely accept the possibility, then you are an atheist, albeit an agnostic atheist. Atheism and agnosticism aren't mutually exclusive.

 

I see what you mean though. It is impossible to scientifically prove the non-existence of anything and hence no-one can ultimately 100% prove that a god does not exist (but the burden of proof lies with the believer, see Russell's teapot). I am an atheist because currently there no evidence to suggest a god does exist, but if evidence does come along then I'll happily admit that I was wrong.

 

With regards to aliens, mathematically given the sheer number of stars and galaxies in the universe there is a very high probability that there are countless other planets that could harbour life and hence a high probability that other alien life exists somewhere in the universe. Not the strongest evidence, but evidence nonetheless.

[Jonnas]

I've always found the belief in a higher deity to be missing the point of religion. Sure, believing in a higher being may be a common point for most religions, but in the end they were made to spread a message.

 

I'm officially Christian (been baptized and all), but in practice I'm probably more of an agnostic. That doesn't mean I don't sympathize with Christian morals, though. The ones regarding love and tolerance that so many seem to forget whenever it's convenient for them.

The idea that those who have been kind and tolerant can't get into heaven because they didn't perform certain rituals or because of some fine print from the bible is ridiculous, at any rate.

 

So yeah, I'm not too fond of the Church, but I'm not going to assume they're all a bunch of close-minded conservative hypocrites, either. At the end of the day, religion is just an ideology that anyone can interpret the way they choose to, just like anything else.

 

B

Him: "If god exists, he must be evil?"

Me: "Why?"

"well why would he create evil and let evil happen?"

 

I've heard an answer to this one. Evil is not a force that exists per se. Much like cold is what we call the absence of heat, evil is simply what we call the absence of good.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I'm not sure I'd call "good" a force, either. Good and evil are moral concepts invented (and highly debated) by humans, not a natural phenomenon like heat.

[Diageo]

I don't like this idea that atheism is the active belief that God doesn't exist. Atheism is a word made up from theism (belief in deities) and a (lack of, I believe Greek in origin). So it is someone without a theism, or religion. One that is not a theist. I also think agnosticism is a weird concept. I think we can all agree that Pikachu (in living form) doesn't exist, there's no proof that it doesn't exist, but if we were to consider everything that could exist we'd be considering forever. The duty lies with those who want to prove something exists, that's how science works. I guess you could set out some rules and prove that they don't work, but no one agrees on rules about God.

 

It seems more like a semantic argument more than anything and it's annoying. It would be much simpler if everyone without a theism was atheist, as the word describes. Additionally, the fact that people describe nearly everything as God is equally annoying. A force that created the universe, let's call that God and something must have done that, so I'm agnostic. That's bullshit. If like Hawkings describes, empty space is made neutral by both matter and anti-matter, positive forces and negative forces, and that matter can be created from nothing from the separation of these. Let's say that it has a immensely small chance of happening, and it only has to happen once for the Big Bang to occur, and so a universe is born. If that is how the universe was created, the idea that this separation, which in this example occurs naturally, is then to be called God and worshipped in any way is ridiculous and frankly, insulting to science. Supernovas created some of the chemicals that allowed for the conception of life, and we don't worship supernovas.

 

The second annoying thing about calling anything God, is that if this entity has no imposition on our lives or the universe, then I see no reason to create a religion around, create categories of belief around it, labels for people in each category and debates over the semantics of what you think God is. To me, you either believe God can influence your life and our universe, in ways that go against the set rules of physics of the universe, and you are a theist, or you don't, and you are an atheist. Anything further than that is pointless.

 

And lastly, I have no respect for Religion, organised or not, and have no qualms correcting the beliefs of those who believe in a God and are theist in the description above. I put them in the same category as those who believe in ghosts, unicorns, fairies, karma, auras, psychics, the afterlife, etc. And yes, I do see myself above them in that regard. I still have friends who believe in that crap, especially the stupid aura thing, and of course in religious deities, and it won't stop me being friends with them, but that won't stop me telling that particular friend that he's wrong. If it's annoying enough, they can stop being my friend, but that is who I am. Obviously I won't just badger him every time I see him, but if he talks about it I will shoot him down.

 

It's like this relative that recently visited, and I don't know what she read, but she got in her head that because of recent findings about quantum physics, that the world is unpredictable and that the only answer is spiritualism and theism. It was infuriating, especially since it was hard to get my point across because all the research I've done in quantum physics wasn't in Portuguese. And of course, since it was a family gathering I couldn't get into a full argument with her. But anyway, people like that should be corrected, and educated on quantum physics properly, instead of respecting their beliefs and leaving them be. Especially since they use science as the root. The need for respect around people's beliefs and culture that has been built up and indoctrinated into the population is appalling, and appears no where else. No one is afraid to argue over musical taste, art, media, nutrition, space exploration blah blah etc. But when it's their beliefs on how the world was created and what happens when we die, we must not question it for some reason. And the reason is clear. You can see through history, that any questioning or disrespect to the bubble religious leaders created led to severe punishment.

 

It's irritating and disgusting really.

[The Bard]

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature...

 

More than anything, I'd call myself an antitheist. Only a bigoted, humourless and malicious god would inflict the sort of privation and misery humanity has seen..

[khilafah]

I am a muslim and dont force islam on anyone. I will debate with Jehovah's when they knock on my door as its good fun.

 

We debate and then all go away smiling..

[Jonnas]

Like Diageo, the distinction between Atheism and Agnosticism (or any other term for "lack of religion") annoys me. I don't care what your views on God or lack thereof are, if you don't follow any religion, that's it, nothing more to be said.

 

I may have claimed to be agnostic, but I was just following the previous discussion on its definition. At the end of the day, what matters is that, despite believing in Christian teachings of morality, I don't actually follow it beyond that (nor any other religion).

Making further distinctions is pointless, and even ironic (I'm reminded of the countless sects and churches Christianity split into).

 

I'm not sure I'd call "good" a force, either. Good and evil are moral concepts invented (and highly debated) by humans, not a natural phenomenon like heat.

 

True enough. I've heard that question be thrown around before, just wanted to offer another take on it.

I suppose I should've worded it differently, though.

[Coolness Bears]

I make my own stuff up for this kind of thing and live by that. You don't want to be part of my religion.

[arab_freak]

At the end of the day, religion is just an ideology that anyone can interpret the way they choose to, just like anything else.

 

This is precisely what I came to understand when I started questioning things as a teenager. I think it's pretty well understood that you can't generalize Muslims as a single group since there exist multiple sects, but at the same time, I don't think it's fair to group think the differences stop there. Shiite Muslims in Iran for example differ greatly from Shiite Muslims in Bahrain or Saudi Arabia. Even the general Sunni population here in Egypt can be dissected into several categories, and to me it all goes to show that we're not as homogenous as we think we are.

 

Using Egypt as an example, it is extremely difficult to find two people of the same faith who believe exactly the same things; and despite living in a country who's exercise of democracy showed a particular leaning towards Islamist principles, it shouldn't necessarily translate to the people having a single, unified vision of an ideological state. There is an Islamist majority, but what kind of political Islam they want to apply is not. Everything in religion is open to interpretation. "Real" Islam doesn't exist anymore as whatever evidence we had to what it was has been lost in time.

 

Saying this in a conservative country like Egypt however puts a lot of people off, so I mostly keep my ideas to myself. I briefly became a non-believer when I was younger, and I'm glad I went through that phase because it helped me use reason in a way that leaves little room for prevailing superstitions and taboos. I have ideas, but that's all they are to me. Ideas in my head. I wouldn't want to force them onto people anymore that I would want them to force theirs on me.

 

I also agree on moogles comment about arrogant atheists. From my experience I've never been in contact with any religious person trying to preach/convert me, however I have had experiences with atheists. One of my close mates is an atheist and he is beyond patronising when it comes to this topic. He tries to explain the lack of god by spouting physics "facts" that he obviously doesn't understand himself, it's pathetic.

 

My friends and I call them "internet atheists" because they're arguments usually come from regurgitated copypasta. It's not that they're atheists that bothers me, it's that they're about as arrogant as the religious zealots they try so hard to distance themselves from. Religion or no religion, nobody likes having things shoved down their throats.

[Mokong]

BUMP OF RESURECTION :p

 

 

 

Was at my sisters Wedding last Thursday and near the end of the church ceremony the priest starts talking about Love cause it was Valentines the week before (and obviously cause it was a wedding) and said something along the lines of "the morden symbols of love are not true symbols of symbols of love, be they valentines cards, flowers or even a heart symbol. If you want to see a true symbol of love it is right there in front of the alter"

 

At this point I thought he meant my sister and new bro-in-law, in some way saying that a couple getting married is a truest symbol of love or something...but then he continued...

 

"it is there in front of the alter, Jesus with his arms outstretched welcoming in all of us to a loving embrace"

 

He was talking about a statue of Jesus on the Cross that was in front of the alter....

 

All I could think is "WTF is he on about? Arms outstretched for a welcoming loving embrace? I don't think so.... it would seem to me he has no choice in the outsretching of his arms given that he is frakking NAILED TO THE CROSS he can't exactly moves his arms even if he wanted to"

 

Plus given the pain he would have been in and the fact he was slowly dying I doubt he would have been thinking "I'd like to give everyone a hug right now"

 

I hate it when Christians do this, glorify the image of a man dead/dying and try to twist it into meaning something else.

 

Also the fact that Jesus on the cross is the main symbol of Christianity.... if you want to remember your "saviour" fine that's grand but the image of the crucifix is just holding him up as more of a Martyr in war time or something.

 

I say bring in the "Buddy Christ"

 

 

See stick that in every church and it would brighten up the places a lot more than a morbid image of a dead man hanging on a cross that seems to be trying to get believers to believe out of fear or pity or something.

[Shorty]

I'm not even slightly religious but I'm pretty sure Christians believe that Jesus chose to die in exchange for God forgiving the sins of all humanity. Hence the symbolism, hence 'saviour', hence representing love.

[Mokong]

I'm not even slightly religious but I'm pretty sure Christians believe that Jesus chose to die in exchange for God forgiving the sins of all humanity. Hence the symbolism, hence 'saviour', hence representing love.

 

True but that is another aspect of it that I don't get anymore. If his dying on the cross meant all "mans" sins were forgiven then why do babies still need to be baptised... which is the "washing away of original sin"..... was this sin not included in "all mans sins are forgiven" somehow?

 

And don't start me on the whole original sin concept. Seriously they still hold an innocent new born responsible/liable or whatever for Adams sins....a fictional character from a fictional story

 

 

 

 

[note: at this point I prolly should mention in case anyone points it out, yes I did get married in a church and yes my son was baptised. Both those were for my wife really. She wanted a church wedding and I wasn't gonna take that "day" away from her (lucky weddings in the Philippines are cheap as hell compared to here) and my son was baptised again cause Joy wanted it and while I'd prefer he not be "forced" into a religion I do hope when he gets older he'll be able to make that choice for himself if he still wants to be Christian/Catholic, some other Christian belief or other religion or none. I won't stop him and I told her on his baptism day if he does want to believe something else when he's older she is not to try force him in staying in her beliefs]

Edited February 26, 2013 by Mokong

[Iun]

atheists get on my nerves.. Probably more than religious preachers. .

 

Oh my word, THIS.

 

It's as if these atheists are somehow privy to some amazing secret of the universe that the rest of the universe hasn't worked out yet. And boy oh BOY are they smug about it.

 

Now, who the fuck does that sound like to you?

[Cube]

Oh my word, THIS.

 

It's as if these atheists are somehow privy to some amazing secret of the universe that the rest of the universe hasn't worked out yet. And boy oh BOY are they smug about it.

 

Now, who the fuck does that sound like to you?

 

These people are exactly why I don't like calling myself "atheist" - it seems to have become a religion of it's own.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

True but that is another aspect of it that I don't get anymore. If his dying on the cross meant all "mans" sins were forgiven then why do babies still need to be baptised... which is the "washing away of original sin"..... was this sin not included in "all mans sins are forgiven" somehow?

 

And don't start me on the whole original sin concept. Seriously they still hold an innocent new born responsible/liable or whatever for Adams sins....a fictional character from a fictional story

 

Sounds to me like you're trying a bit too hard to make sense of it.

 

Oh my word, THIS.

 

It's as if these atheists are somehow privy to some amazing secret of the universe that the rest of the universe hasn't worked out yet. And boy oh BOY are they smug about it.

 

Now, who the fuck does that sound like to you?

 

But that's the thing, there's no "secret" in atheism; we acknowledge that there's a lot of stuff we don't know or have only vague theories about, but unlike religions we don't conclude "... therefore God/aliens/etc." To be honest, I'm personally a bit tired of people comparing atheism to religion when they're exact opposites. It's like saying colourless is a colour.

[Jonnas]

Their point is that strawman atheists force a specific world view on you, and make no effort whatsoever to understand why religious people think the way they do. Like the strawman religious folk they like to accuse.

[Cube]

To be honest, I'm personally a bit tired of people comparing atheism to religion when they're exact opposites. It's like saying colourless is a colour.

 

Black?

 

Anyway, the complaint is not atheism as a whole, but those who use it the same way the bad kind of religious people use religion, who go out of their way to complain about religion and treat all religious people as people who can never be right.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Their point is that strawman atheists force a specific world view on you, and make no effort whatsoever to understand why religious people think the way they do. Like the strawman religious folk they like to accuse.

 

But as you say, that is in itself a strawman argument. It's all a big ball of hypocrisy.

 

Black?

 

Anyway, the complaint is not atheism as a whole, but those who use it the same way the bad kind of religious people use religion, who go out of their way to complain about religion and treat all religious people as people who can never be right.

 

Black is not colourless.

 

I'm just tired of people lumping together two as diametric concepts as religion and atheism just because both sides happen to have arrogant members. You simply cannot equate atheism and religion in any way; to do so is missing the point entirely, and it rather annoys me.

[Beast]

Black?

 

[Fierce_LiNk]

Not really related to anything being discussed/not atheist stuff: I've got a person that I worked with a few years back still on my facebook. At the time, he seemed like a decent man. However, every post he makes on his wall is either a shared photo from a page called "Infidels of Britain" or something which just causes these expressions ---->

 

Taken from his facebook: "I'm going to eat my bacon sandwich outside a mosque because I can in MY country hahaha"

 

Swiftly followed by 9 likes and other comments underneath.

 

Another one: "Just seen an advert for ramadan saying what they were going to do for charity, i've got a great idea stop claiming our benefits when you haven't contributed to the pot, bringing all your family here and culturally changing our country. Brilliant first step then start making your way to the nearest boat home!"

 

His current shared photo is one that says "Fuck Islam and Fuck Mohammed."

 

Ironically, when I knew him at work, he gave me the address for an amazing curry house. One of the best I ever had.

[MoogleViper]

Not really related to anything being discussed/not atheist stuff: I've got a person that I worked with a few years back still on my facebook. At the time, he seemed like a decent man. However, every post he makes on his wall is either a shared photo from a page called "Infidels of Britain" or something which just causes these expressions ---->

 

Taken from his facebook: "I'm going to eat my bacon sandwich outside a mosque because I can in MY country hahaha"

 

Swiftly followed by 9 likes and other comments underneath.

 

Another one: "Just seen an advert for ramadan saying what they were going to do for charity, i've got a great idea stop claiming our benefits when you haven't contributed to the pot, bringing all your family here and culturally changing our country. Brilliant first step then start making your way to the nearest boat home!"

 

His current shared photo is one that says "Fuck Islam and Fuck Mohammed."

 

Ironically, when I knew him at work, he gave me the address for an amazing curry house. One of the best I ever had.

 

That's shit. If only Facebook had some sort of feature, where you could undo adding somebody as a friend.

 

Oh well, guess we'll have to live with it.

[Fierce_LiNk]

That's shit. If only Facebook had some sort of feature, where you could undo adding somebody as a friend.

 

Oh well, guess we'll have to live with it.

 

Haha, no way. I'm keeping him there for the hilarity. Why would you delete somebody who produces...ahem...gold, such as this?

[Iun]

 

I'm just tired of people lumping together two as diametric concepts as religion and atheism just because both sides happen to have arrogant members. You simply cannot equate atheism and religion in any way; to do so is missing the point entirely, and it rather annoys me.

 

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree: having arrogant members who superciliously claim to have "got it" and treating people who "haven't got it" as children is a valid comparison.

 

While there is no comparison between the belief and non-belief system, there's a comparison to be made between the people within it.