Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby. (courtesy of old scratch).Athiesm is a religion like empty is a color.
Well, you sure have to wonder WHY all that stuff was written.
.
I just cant believe that all the worlds religions, all the scripture, all the experiences of the mystics.... are all about.... nothing.
.
That explains a portion of religion, the explanatory myths and moral codes. But what about the rest? (and there is a lot more.)People wanted explanations of how the universe works, and it was easier to make a lot of unfalsifiable assertions than to conduct scientific investigations. It also gave the writer a moral authority and allowed him to make up arbitrary laws in order to keep people in awe of him (the self-proclaimed channeler of the voice of God).
That explains a portion of religion, the explanatory myths and moral codes. But what about the rest? (and there is a lot more.)
.
I just cant believe that all the worlds religions, all the scripture, all the experiences of the mystics.... are all about.... nothing.
I'd say very much so. While they follow the motions, keep in line, and do all the things that good Christians do, if they don't believe in Christ, then they're not Christians. And there's certainly reason to appear as a good believer. To do otherwise would make them ostracized. I imagine some people hope that faith will come to them in time. I imagine others don't really care.So Christians who only go to church at Christmas are part of a non-religious type of Christianity?
No faith required, so it's not a religion according to webster.Let me define what I mean by religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.
Naw, too broad of a definition.If you have a philosophy, then you have a religion.
Sorry dude, atheism is the first one. And yeah, I'd say it's unprovable. So what? It's still the most likely answer. And most likely, the sun will rise tomorrow.Postive Assertion(which is unprovable): the belief that God does not exist
Negative Assertion(correct definition of atheism): the lack of belief in the existence of God
Teaching people is hardly fakery.Something is going on there, aside from all the fakery.
Fiction.I'm not saying its God. I'm just saying.... well, what is it?
I asked this one a while back. It's setting the footing for the argument that atheism is the default position. ie, babies and chinamen are atheists. That way atheisms seems more "natural", and this whole god thing is a product of man. That's the real debate. I'm not sure, and I don't think it really matters. I would say that ignorance is the default position, and I don't think that ignorance really fits into any sort of -ism.To the people who call it a religion, what is the point?
If you don't have it, there's the old standby "Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color".Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Shenanigans! I certainly believe in humans. I saw one just the other day. And life is squishy. That's not a perfect description, but it's fits.Humans are ... and unbelievable. Life is indescribable.
Postive Assertion(which is unprovable): the belief that God does not existSorry dude, atheism is the first one. And yeah, I'd say it's unprovable. So what? It's still the most likely answer. And most likely, the sun will rise tomorrow.
Negative Assertion(correct definition of atheism): the lack of belief in the existence of God
Is there an in-betweenActually both of them are atheism. One is called hard atheism. One is called soft atheism.
Is Buddhism a religion?
.
People wanted explanations of how the universe works, and it was easier to make a lot of unfalsifiable assertions than to conduct scientific investigations. It also gave the writer a moral authority and allowed him to make up arbitrary laws in order to keep people in awe of him (the self-proclaimed channeler of the voice of God).
If you study the different forms of religion throught known history, you will notice a loose descernable pattern emerge. Oddly, ( or quite expected, depending on you POV) as society has changed, religion too changes to suit the needs of the society. Does this mean that physical reality bends and changes to our will? No, I just think our opinions change.
Actually both of them are atheism. One is called hard atheism. One is called soft atheism.
I would say it isn't tough to find confused "theists" around these partsAnd what is this suppose to mean?
Let me take a wild guess ...
A soft atheist really isn't an atheist or just can't make up his/her mind if there is a god or not or just doesn't want to make any outspoken verbal commitments by saying: there is no God ... or he could just care less about the entire God argument whatsoever.
The hard atheist is the one who has no problems whatsoever saying there is no God period.
Can the first atheist on this list be called an agnostic? It's possible however, I wouldn't even give him that much credit. I would just consider him an apathetic agnostic or not even one at all. Just a confused theist.
Thank you! I must add this to my usual list of responses for when this question comes up.
And what is this suppose to mean?
Let me take a wild guess ...
A soft atheist really isn't an atheist or just can't make up his/her mind if there is a god or not or just doesn't want to make any outspoken verbal commitments by saying: there is no God ... or he could just care less about the entire God argument whatsoever.
The hard atheist is the one who has no problems whatsoever saying there is no God period.
Can the first atheist on this list be called an agnostic?
It's possible however, I wouldn't even give him that much credit. I would just consider him an apathetic agnostic or not even one at all. Just a confused theist.
It's a matter of personal prefrence and honesty by acknowledging the limits of KNOWLEDGE.
If you claim you can KNOW that there is no god, you have no right to critisize people who claim to KNOW there is a god.
Huh?You can call them a frog if you wish. Which of course doesn't mean your assement is accurate.
I personally label myself an agnostic atheist. Am I really a confused theist? No I am not. I don't believe in god. I'm just honest enough to ackowledge the limits of knowledge.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?