Please tell me there are more Atheists out there...

Remove all ads!

But who gave these people authority? I can understand allowing them into the faith (to not do so would be downright crazy), but how did such "abusers" get into high positions? You would think that an organization that preaches love and forgiveness would have an IA division or something to prevent the freaks from getting into a position where they could do such horrible things. Having no safeguards simply points to incompetence, and I, for one, would not want risk being held to the whim of a madman simply because noone opposed his rise to power.

I'd rather think for myself and not be tied down to some rules that a delirious starving man hallucinated in the mountains. For the record, I used to refer to myself as atheist (for lack of a better description), until I found out what an agnostic was. Now I'm proud to be an agnostic.

 

Hahaha, so true, so true. As I said earlier, this religion stuff was created by man, whereas science is just being proven by man.

And, just to clarify (so that I can make sure of which category I am in), agnostics believe that there is no way to prove god's exsistence, correct?

Cause if so, I am a mix - I don't believe that we can prove the exsistence of a god, but I also don't believe in one either. Or do those go hand in hand...?

Crap, i've confused myself. In anycase, I don't believe in religion, their "hope", or their men with beards.

 

Over the last two thousand years, the Roman Catholic Hierarchy has become increasingly political, thus you have politicians running spiritual affairs. When some pope in 1095 decrees that Christian nations ought to rule the holy land, it's no different than George W sending troops into Iraq in 2005. When politics trump spiritual concerns, is it still truly religion?

By way of contrast, in 2004, two members of the Quorum of the 12 apostles passed away. There was NO speculation amongst the membership as to who would be the new members of the Quorum of the twelve, and the new apostles were announced at the next General conference as scheduled.

 

Well, in America, in case you haven't noticed, there is (supposed) separation of church and state, as there should be.

How is it no different, please explain. A pope decreeing that Christians should rule a holy land, and George Bush sending troops to fight in Iraq... what is the connection...?

 

@Saber:
You're probably an atheist if you believe that there is no God. Agnostics accept it as a possibility (ranging from "remote possibility" to "definite possibility") that there might be (a) devine being(s), but believe that there is currently no way to know for sure. There's also no way to know what he/she/it(/they) might be like if there were one (or more). Basically, it's a big question mark with a happy ending.

Though I don't know how everyone deals with it, I personally have faith that everything is as it's supposed to be; the specifics don't matter much to me.

 

It's not a connection, but the same charge. Both were motivated by pride and arrogance (at least most on SP claim that was George W's motives).

My point is that the crusades were, in truth, less about spirituality, and more about politics. At what point does it ceace to truly be about religion?

 

I can't help but point out how easily this can be switched around from the opposite perspective; science can precisely in some cases explain (pardon the oversimplification) the where, the what, the when, etc., whereas religion focuses on explaining what science has failed to touch; the why. You won't commonly find the answer to "why am I here?", should such a thing concern you, in science books...and for many, that's the most important question of all. This is the reason why "some people can't let go of religion" from a personal view.

 

I believe the cutoff point is the reason. The reason given for the Crusades was religious in nature. The fact that the one giving the orders simply made it up does not matter. What matters is the religion/cult behaviour of the soldiers believing such ridiculous orders and slaughtering people "in God's name". You can't blame God for it if he didn't order it, but you can sure as hell blame the organization that did. Though the current organization should not be blamed for the mistakes of a past one, it still will be. Such is the nature of the human need for revenge; just take your lumps and apologize.

 

So you blame one church, don't hold that against the rest of us. I would argue that this was the orders of the hierarchy at the time, and would even ask that the modern RCC not be accountable for actions of 910 years ago...

 

just stepping into this thread...
i'm not an agnostic, i would say that i'm a gnostic. and no i'm not making up that term haha. (message me if your curious about it).

concerning death, i know from my own experience that there's more after death. I know for a fact that human beings can exist seperately from their bodies, which implies that your existance doesnt end w/death. Anyone can see this for themselves by trying out astral projection/out of body experiences.

so there's my 2 cents about that!
later,
-PT

 

Well, the obvious answer would be because Daddy got overexcited and forgot pasting Mommy's belly is preferred.


What you are silently positing is this: Presupposing there is a point to my existence...

 

Indeed George W and the medieval pope may or may not have had similar motives on a personal level, that can never be known by any of us. The important issue is that the crusaders believed they were fighting for a just cause, exactly as extremist Palestine suicide bombers do. They do the things they do because of their faith, and the rest of the world gets to suffer because of it.

Devout believers may now argue that the faith of above examples is misplaced, misguided, etc. But it *is their faith.* Arguing that their faith is "wrong" and claiming your own faith is "right" just proves my point.

My point wasn't that we should burn down the catholic church - that would make me just as bad the fundamentalists. I'm trying to point out that as long as there are organized religions, they will clash and fight for power - whether territories or converts - and cause great harm in doing so. Yet, what can be done about it? Can we deny someone's faith, in other words, tell them what they should believe - be that a religion or atheism?

It would make me very happy to see a world without organized religion. Where people could accept the fact that they can't *know* what happens when they die, and still live their lives without a constant nagging fear of what's beyond - accept the *possibility* that there may indeed be nothing at all. Live and let live. But I'm not about to try to force that idea of a harmonious utopia down anyone's throat, because 1) It's not right to do that 2) I don't think it's ever gonna happen.

All I can do is try to point out things and provoke thoughts, by means of a civilized discussion, exchanging of thoughts and so forth. I get a little heated up sometimes, but I try not to.

On a side note, to be clear, I'm an agnostic leaning towards the "very remote possibility" type of thinking. And I personally believe that religions are man-made.

And I feel like a tree-hugger right now.

 

The concept of God only even enters my thoughts when I'm visiting the AoDA. Here, the only person who's view of God I have felt predisposed to is Rally.

I used to describe myself as an Atheist until watching Johnathon Miller, "A History of Disbelief" http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/atheism.shtml
His description of his own beliefs mirrored mine fairly accurately. Because being "anti" means there is actually something there to be anti about, he dislikes the designation of atheist as it gives too much credence to theism.

Put me down as a non-believer who is against religious parties being allowed to dictate to the rest of us.
If you want a particular label, then possibly a "secular humanist" would be the best description, though that's only after I had a brief look at wiki so I don't know if it truly marries my beliefs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanist

 

Can you explain how you know that human beings can exist separately from their bodies?

I am not afraid of dying (sure, it'll hurt if I die by unnatural causes, by what the heck, too bad for me), and I accept that there may be nothing left. That's life (or death, rather), and I'll live my life happily.

Hmm, your insight (or his) has caught my attention. I don't like continually changing what I say I am (it gives people reason to not trust what I say as plausible, i guess), but it is true: I do not believe in religion. I guess I only used atheist because it is a more common term. In any case, no matter the term, i do not believe in religion, or their 'god(s)'. Call it what you will.

[ October 15, 2005, 00:14: Message edited by: Saber ]

 

I use the word agnostic to describe my personal belief a lot. Because I can't really dismiss something I have or have not experienced.

[ October 15, 2005, 02:09: Message edited by: Zurga ]

 

But Religion should not be about power, but rather about personal salvation and doing good for society. It is just to preach the tennet of your religion according to your faith, but no single faith has the right to dictate the laws of the land. No church has the right to send the faithful into military action, but they are expected to support the laws of the land. The wisdom in the Bible is lost when compared to the attrocities ordered or committed by those that took the Name of God to justify their own vain ends...

 

As i said, anyone can see it for themselves by trying out astral projection/(out of body experiences. Its something that anyone can do with enough effort. try googling it or something, theres tons of info on it out there. or message me or something if you want i guess.
-PT

 

Hmm, interesting. I still don't believe that we have souls or anything, but whatever, believe what you will.

 

I find it hard to believe anything. The big bang for example. Something very small suddenly expands and becomes the universe. How? How can almost nothing expand and become everything just like that? And how did that very small something come to exist? How can something have no beginning? This applies to gods and whatnots aswell. How can something just have existed forever?

Still I wonder sometimes, when I am sick or in extreme pain, if god or whoever is punishing me for "thinking the wrong way", and I wonder if I can cut a deal with him/her/it, like if god takes away my pain immedietly then I will start believing. Then, of course, I start thinking that if he/she/it exists then he/she/it probably wont take away my pains or illnesses because it is realy a test to my faith...

It's a vicious cycle...

[ October 15, 2005, 10:52: Message edited by: Bahir the Red ]

 

Practically all religions *are* about personal salvation and doing good. They just can't accept other views of it. And that is the problem. Most religions involve attempting to convert people, which, if done peacefully through civil conversation and accepting "no" if it comes to that, is not such a bad thing. But when there are several conflicting religions all trying to do that, not accepting each other, and preaching their tennets rather forcefully, they clash and nothing good comes of it.

And because there really is no definite way of knowing which religion is right (if any), it's not not such a valid argument to say who got it wrong and took god's name in vain and so forth.

Many religions justify themselves via a chain of conclusions such as this one: "This faith is right because God said so. We know God said so because it's documented in this holy book. We know this holy book is accurate because it's the holy book of this faith, and this faith is right because God said so..."

In other words the holy book, be it of christianity or islam or any other, is "right because it says it is right."

So how exactly do you know *this* specific religion is right (insert your faith of choice), and *that one* is wrong? (insert one you don't believe in)

What if there indeed is a God, and on that fateful day when you die, he tells you you should've read some *other* holy book, followed some other tenets, and sends you to Hell for having lived your entire life as a heretic?

How do you know which faith to follow, when they all say they are right, making the same chain conclusion arguments proving it?