The trouble with atheism

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Alfheim
What do you think of the views of this progam? This program is called The Trouble with Atheism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzLpx2nFTc0

Bardock42
I find that comparing Atheism to Theism in this respect is a bit off.

Surely there are many idiots, but atheism is not actually a set belief system, if you want to be a radical and say that atheism should be the only acceptable view you can do that, but there are no spokespeople for atheism, it is not actually as institutionalized as Religions are.

And to say that the deaths caused by communism should count for atheism is nonsense, none of the leaders killed for atheism, they just happened to be atheist, just as some scientist happen to be Religious.

There is a big difference. One are killing because they are Religious the other are killing and happen to be non-religious.

leonheartmm
people who compare atheism with theism ive always believed are NORMALLY for the most part theists themselves who dont seem to win any logical debates against atheists and as a last ditch or just to add sumthin extra try to compare theism to atheism n trying to prove that atheism is just as much FAITH BASED as theism , in doing so trying to bring the two on the same ground and making th masses believe that phenomenon wise there's no difference between the two. this is done to hide the fact that theism itself is crumbling due to lack of logic and is FAR inferior logically to atheism and this way they can falsely try n decrease the difference between the two to make their own dogmas sound not THAT much less appealing to the rational mind than atheism. overall its completely false. THEISM, is belief/dogma in ur version of god and his commandments/heaven/hell soul etc, while athesim isnt an OPPSING belief but simply LACK of that belief and thus not the same in anyway. atheism dose have a FUNDAMENTALLY faith based foundation but this faith is more AXIOM based as opposed to based on large non axiomic dogmas.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
I find that comparing Atheism to Theism in this respect is a bit off.


Well of course thats relative.

Originally posted by Bardock42

Surely there are many idiots, but atheism is not actually a set belief system, if you want to be a radical and say that atheism should be the only acceptable view you can do that, but there are no spokespeople for atheism, it is not actually as institutionalized as Religions are.

Well here the problem. What is an athiestic ideaology? An ideology that doesnt belive in God and it doesnt matter how you spin it Communism comes under that banner therefore they speak for atheism.

Originally posted by Bardock42

And to say that the deaths caused by communism should count for atheism is nonsense, none of the leaders killed for atheism, they just happened to be atheist, just as some scientist happen to be Religious.


Well this is interesting it seems that the creator of the program has the same views as me. Do you think its possible, maybe just maybe you are creating some boundaries that do not exist?

Communism did kill in the name of atheism because they were trying to make atheism the prevailing belief.

Originally posted by Bardock42

There is a big difference. One are killing because they are Religious the other are killing and happen to be non-religious.

There is no difference you are creating something that isnt there. Part of Communism is that religon is the opium of the masses. This is one of Communism's "pillars", they persecuted religous people because there ideology believed that religon was inferior. So no they are killing in the name of Communism which is an atheistic belief system.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
Well of course thats relative.



Well here the problem. What is an athiestic ideaology? An ideology that doesnt belive in God and it doesnt matter how you spin it Communism comes under that banner therefore they speak for atheism.



Well this is interesting it seems that the creator of the program has the same views as me. Do you think its possible, maybe just maybe you are creating some boundaries that do not exist?

Communism did kill in the name of atheism because they were trying to make atheism the prevailing belief.



There is no difference you are creating something that isnt there. Part of Communism is that religon is the opium of the masses. This is one of Communism's "pillars", they persecuted religous people because there ideology believed that religon was inferior. So no they are killing in the name of Communism which is an atheistic belief system.

No, there is a difference.

People are killed because of Religion..
They are not killed because of Atheism.

I mean, every rational being can see the difference. When you talk to a Religious fundamentalist they say "I killed them because God says we should kill the nonbelievers" if you talk to a communist they'd say " He got killed for the good of the community" or something, they would not say "He got killed because atheism told me to kill him".

You keep bringing up that point at we keep telling you that it is just not logically the same.

The person that made that documentary by the way, somehow assumes that just because he sees no difference between a scientific probable and a scientific improbable there is no difference.

Atheists themselves believe not in God because it is scientifically improbable and they usually are not trying to kill people in the name of their believe and they are not using legislature to forbid people to believe in what they want.

The belief that there is no God is ultimately much different from organized Religion, even if that documentary tries to imply different.

leonheartmm
the topic is parallel to sayin, NOT BELIEVING IN SHIVA ALSO MAKES PEOPLE KILL JUST AS MUCH AS BELIEVING IN SHIVA. now thas nonesense, there arent only people in the world who either BELIEVE IN SHIVA or DONT BELIEVE IN SHIVA, there are many many different people in the world who ALL have one thing in common, ie, not believing in shiva, but this NOT BELIEVING isnt the thing responsible for their killing people, it is their PERSONAL beliefs which are in MANY things which might or might not prompt them to kill or not kill. NOT believing in shia is sumthing all killers and non killers OUTSIDE the shiva belief circle have in common. it isnt a causative factor and thus can not be held responsible just like atheism can not be held responsible for the killings that all people who dont believe in god partake. people are ATHESTS, and THEN have varying personal beliefs WHICH are responsible for the acts they commit. NOT BELIEIVING isnt a BELIEF SYSTEM.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, there is a difference.

People are killed because of Religion..
They are not killed because of Atheism.

Nonsense.

Originally posted by Bardock42

I mean, every rational being can see the difference. When you talk to a Religious fundamentalist they say "I killed them because God says we should kill the nonbelievers"

Yeah.


Originally posted by Bardock42

if you talk to a communist they'd say " He got killed for the good of the community" or something, they would not say "He got killed because atheism told me to kill him".

Yeah because Communism says that religon is the opium of the masses. Therefore he is doing it because his doctrine tells him to do it. The same way that the Quran says kill non-believers.

Originally posted by Bardock42

You keep bringing up that point

I and loads of other people including the maker of the program.


Originally posted by Bardock42

at we

Whose we?


Originally posted by Bardock42

keep telling you that it is just not logically the same.

If you look for differences you will find them. Identical twins have differences as well. Of course there are differences. roll eyes (sarcastic)

Originally posted by Bardock42

The person that made that documentary by the way, somehow assumes that just because he sees no difference between a scientific probable and a scientific improbable there is no difference.

I'll have to watch it again but I dont think so. From what I gathered in the whole series is that he thought that science was more rational but religon had its good points.

Originally posted by Bardock42

Atheists themselves believe not in God because it is scientifically improbable and they usually are not trying to kill people in the name of their believe and they are not using legislature to forbid people to believe in what they want.

Well again theres Communism....

Originally posted by Bardock42

The belief that there is no God is ultimately much different from organized Religion, even if that documentary tries to imply different.

Yeah I guess he doesnt know what hes talking about either. I guess I should just agree with you.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
NOT BELIEIVING isnt a BELIEF SYSTEM.

Communism isnt a belief system?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
Nonsense.



Yeah.




Yeah because Communism says that religon is the opium of the masses. Therefore he is doing it because his doctrine tells him to do it. The same way that the Quran says kill non-believers.



I and loads of other people including the maker of the program.




Whose we?




If you look for differences you will find them. Identical twins have differences as well. Of course there are differences. roll eyes (sarcastic)



I'll have to watch it again but I dont think so. From what I gathered in the whole series is that he thought that science was more rational but religon had its good points.



Well again theres Communism....



Yeah I guess he doesnt know what hes talking about either. I guess I should just agree with you.



Communism isnt a belief system?

When did communism is a system that has no believe in God. But it doesn't kill people because it doesn't have that, but because of other believes.

I mean, be fair here, if a Christian was a fascist, would you say that it is their believe in God that makes them kill Jews or their believe in fascism?

It is in fact two very different things. If you just can't see that we can't really go on talking about it.



Well, I took it directly from the documentary, where he said that he can't see a difference between believing that a God started the Big Bang and not believing that, well, scientifically seen there is a difference.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
When did communism is a system that has no believe in God. But it doesn't kill people because it doesn't have that, but because of other believes.

Ok the english is a bit mashed up here. Are you saying that its NOT their lack of belief in God that makes them kill?

Originally posted by Bardock42

I mean, be fair here,

I am, I think this is just a classic case of "You dont understand because you dont agree."


Originally posted by Bardock42

if a Christian was a fascist, would you say that it is their believe in God that makes them kill Jews or their believe in fascism?

It is in fact two very different things. If you just can't see that we can't really go on talking about it.

Now that depends. Let me summarise your point.

1. Communists may have killed lots of people but they didnt do it in the name of atheism.
2. A Facist Christian kills Jews because of facism not because of Chrisanity BUT...

You are saying that religous people kill because it says so in the Bible for example. Correct?

Its the samething in Communism, part of Communism is that religon is the opuim of the masses and that relgion should be got rid of. So persecuting religous people is what a Communist is supposed to do and Communism is an atheistic belief system. Therefore they are doing it in the name of atheism, the same way a muslim fundies kills because the Quran tells him to.

Originally posted by Bardock42

Well, I took it directly from the documentary, where he said that he can't see a difference between believing that a God started the Big Bang and not believing that, well, scientifically seen there is a difference.

Well from what I understood is this. The Big Bang isnt a proven fact its just a thoery. Therefore there is no difference between belief in the Big Bang and God because belief in god is a theory as well.

Bardock42
Yes, there is a difference.

The religious people do kill because their Religion tells them to.
Communists don't kill because atheism tells them to. Atheism can't tell them, it is just a standard belief that there is no God. They kill because of Communism. And yes, one part of Communism is the Atheism, but, it is not atheism that said to do it.

You don't see the difference? Honestly?

And again, that's what you understand, there is an enormous difference between a general belief and a scientific theory. The Big Bang is hundreds of times more likely, it actually has evidence speaking for itself. It is a theory, just like Gravity. Are you saying that believing in furry little man that always pull you to the center of the earth is no different to the theory of Gravity?

ADarksideJedi
I feel the trouble with Atheism is that there are way too many questions about what they believe in.A Christian can just say there belief without rasing any questions at all.jm

Bardock42
Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I feel the trouble with Atheism is that there are way too many questions about what they believe in.A Christian can just say there belief without rasing any questions at all.jm

What do you mean by that?

ADarksideJedi
I have a friend who is an atheist.So I ask him one day why he choose to be one.His answear he has no idea and that he just is.If someone wants to have faith in there religion they should be able to say why they pick a certain religion to come.JM

Bardock42
Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I have a friend who is an atheist.So I ask him one day why he choose to be one.His answear he has no idea and that he just is.If someone wants to have faith in there religion they should be able to say why they pick a certain religion to come.JM I agree.

Though why are you religious?

Also, most atheists have good reason to believe what they believe.

Storm
Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I have a friend who is an atheist.So I ask him one day why he choose to be one.His answear he has no idea and that he just is.If someone wants to have faith in there religion they should be able to say why they pick a certain religion to come.JM
Atheism can be part of a religion, but it can' t be a religion by itself.

Alfheim
I'll respond to your posts later Bardock

Originally posted by Storm
Atheism can be part of a religion, but it can' t be a religion by itself.

Why not? Can Monontheism be a religon itself?

ADarksideJedi
That is true.Got to go.Bye till tonight.jm

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
I'll respond to your posts later Bardock



Why not? Can Monontheism be a religon itself?

Whatever


I think she is referring to atheism, just like theism not being a religion, but a description of a belief.

Ushgarak
Originally posted by Alfheim
Communism isnt a belief system?

if you count a poltical approach as a belief system, then yes,

But atheism isn't. Atheism is an attribute of certain views; it cannot be a belief itself, by definition. It's a lack of a belief.

Anyway, saying that Communism 'speaks' for atheism is insane, because that is trying to make atheism some sort of defined approach in of itself, which is nonsense.

All that speaks for is Stalin's brand of Communism. The fact that this happened to be atheist is neither here nor there. No-one has ever said that atheism automatically equals good. But the atheists do tend to say that religion normally = bad.

Ushgarak
Originally posted by Alfheim
I'll respond to your posts later Bardock



Why not? Can Monontheism be a religon itself?

No of course it can't. It's an aspect OF a religion.

Storm
Atheism is not a belief system. It doesn' t consist of an integrated system of doctrines, beliefs, and ideas that are used to provide guidance and stability in people' s lives. Atheism implies no further belief system. It implies no beliefs about politics, no philosophy, no beliefs about society, no beliefs about science, no beliefs about religion. If you know that a person is an atheist, then you know that he or she lacks belief in gods. Nothing more, nothing less.

How many claim that mere theism, which is nothing more than a belief in the existence of at least one god, is all by itself a religion?

WrathfulDwarf
My take is this....

...if Atheists are human beings then there are bound to make mistakes. Just like Religious people.

There I said it....do they have large egos? Yup, they sure do. Just like other people.

ThePittman

Ytse
Originally posted by ThePittman
but how can you have rules and guidelines to being an Atheist when there are none?

There is but one rule to being an atheist:

1) You do not affirm the existence of any deity.

-the end-

ThePittman
Originally posted by Ytse
There is but one rule to being an atheist:

1) You do not affirm the existence of any deity.

-the end- OK you got me stick out tongue

lord xyz
Originally posted by Alfheim
What do you think of the views of this progam? This program is called The Trouble with Atheism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzLpx2nFTc0 Britain has most Atheists. w00t

inimalist
I really don't like how Dawkins has been branded as the "radical" athiest. Honestly, he normally puts many conditions on his statements and in fact, in his "manefesto" of athiesm, conciedes that he can only claim to be scientifically agnostic about the idea of God, a statement many athiests would consider soft on God. The series that the clip is taken from was origionally going to be named something much more benign than "the root of evil", however, BBC, against Dawkins' wishes, named it such, understanding how much controversy it would create. Dawkins is willing to ask people questions to their face, but when you talk about fanatacism, he is way down on the list.

If you want more radical atheism, go look up some of the Marquis de Sade. Or even failing that, look up Sam Harris. He is a modern atheist that is promoting people being "conversationally intollorent" of religion.

Dawkins = scape goat whipping boy

and honestly, he is a REAL soft target for theists

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
There is but one rule to being an atheist:

1) You do not affirm the existence of any deity.

-the end-

wink that is also acceptable for agnosticism

Alfheim

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
wink that is also acceptable for agnosticism

Yep. Agnostics are atheists as well. Like squares are rectangles.

lord xyz
If Atheism is a religion, or becoming a religion, what do they believe?

Alfheim
Originally posted by lord xyz
If Atheism is a religion, or becoming a religion, what do they believe?

Theres no god I guess.

lord xyz
Originally posted by Alfheim
Theres no god I guess. So we believe in nothing!

ThePittman
In a way "evangelical atheists" are wrong, there are fanatics on both sides and each having their own agenda and twisting and corrupting an idea to suit their needs.

Alfheim
Originally posted by ThePittman
In a way "evangelical atheists" are wrong,

How are they wrong? Wrong for saying atheism is a religon? Isnt that a matter of opinion?

Originally posted by ThePittman

there are fanatics on both sides and each having their own agenda and twisting and corrupting an idea to suit their needs.

Ok I agree.

Originally posted by lord xyz
So we believe in nothing!

Er yeah you do a belief in no god is a belief. Also evngelical athiests disagree.

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
Yep. Agnostics are atheists as well. Like squares are rectangles.

wow

so, your statement is square = rectangle?

you are arguing that 2 similar things are identical?

I see the connection between atheism and agnosticism, but that only exists if you look at the question from a theistic view.

For instance, as someone with no religious belief who would not call themselves an atheist (I don't think I need a special word to express my disbelief in fairy tales) there is a gulf of difference between an atheist and an agnostic.

Hell, I see huge ideological differences between self identifying and non identifying atheists. The same way any geometrists is going to see differences between a square and a rectangle. They are close when compared to a circle, but different when compared to eachother

inimalist
Originally posted by Alfheim

So a being that created the universe is not a scientific concept?


yes, that is a correct statement

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
so, your statement is square = rectangle?

In geometry, a rectangle is defined as a quadrilateral where all four of its angles are right angles.

A square meets all the criteria. It's a quadrilateral with four right angles.

To make it more clear:

All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. Just like all agnostics are atheists but not all atheists are agnostic.

You dig?

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
In geometry, a rectangle is defined as a quadrilateral where all four of its angles are right angles.

A square meets all the criteria. It's a quadrilateral with four right angles.

To make it more clear:

All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. Just like all agnostics are atheists but not all atheists are agnostic.

You dig?

no

agnostics do not refute the existance of god, they say either they don't know or that they can't know (two very different schools of agnosticism that should hardly be lumped together).

a self identifying atheist actively denies the existance of God

a non-identifying atheist is only an atheist by strict definition. Colloqually, I am an atheist, but that says absolutly nothing about my belief or behaviour the way it would for a self-identifying atheist.

I guess I see the square/rectangle analogy, and like any good analogy, it falls apart when nuance is introduced. It is a wonderful analogy if you assume that the default truth is "god exists or needs to be disproven". If you view the world from the "God is a fairy tale myth" perspective, it is useless, since someone who thinks their atheism involves disprooving something that is clearly non-existant differs dramatically from those who don't entertain the hypothesis in the first place.

Alfheim
Originally posted by inimalist
yes, that is a correct statement

What that a creator is NOT a scientfic concept?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, there is a difference.

The religious people do kill because their Religion tells them to.
Communists don't kill because atheism tells them to. Atheism can't tell them, it is just a standard belief that there is no God. They kill because of Communism. And yes, one part of Communism is the Atheism, but, it is not atheism that said to do it.

You don't see the difference? Honestly?


Ok ive been thinking this through. You know what you cant say people kill in the name of atheism, you know why because its bad english. You cant say people kill in the name of Monotheism either. What do you say, you say people kill in the name of religon. Whats the opposite of religon a belief system that doesnt believe in God. So you may not say that people kill in the name of atheism but Communism is the athiestic equivalent of a religon.

It seems to me the only reason why you dont say you kill in the name of atheism is semantics.

You dont kill in the name of Monthiesm but Chrisanity is an example of it. You dont kill in the name of atheism but Communism is an example of it.

inimalist
Originally posted by Alfheim
What that a creator is NOT a scientfic concept?


ya, thats right

it is possible to envision a universe created by a being, or even a cosmic being. That makes it an ok philosophy or belief, but not anything closely related to a scientific concept or theory.

Basically the idea of a creator fails in every aspect that something has to have to even be considered a scientific theory. It fails occam's razor, falsifiability, repetability and has no predictive power.

However, the be all and end all is this: There is no experiment you could run to prove a creator's existance, and none you could do to determine the effect of the supernatural on the universe.

This doesn't mean necessarily that a creator does not exist, but more that it is as far from a scientific concept as something can get.

Alfheim
Originally posted by inimalist
ya, thats right

it is possible to envision a universe created by a being, or even a cosmic being. That makes it an ok philosophy or belief, but not anything closely related to a scientific concept or theory.

Basically the idea of a creator fails in every aspect that something has to have to even be considered a scientific theory. It fails occam's razor, falsifiability, repetability and has no predictive power.

However, the be all and end all is this: There is no experiment you could run to prove a creator's existance, and none you could do to determine the effect of the supernatural on the universe.

This doesn't mean necessarily that a creator does not exist, but more that it is as far from a scientific concept as something can get.

Im just taking your word for it. I thoughtb intellignet design was a scientific theory?

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
a self identifying atheist actively denies the existance of God

When I say atheist I simply mean one who doesn't affirm the existence of any deity. Etymologically that seems to be the most sound way of putting it.



Either you believe in god or you don't. I think agnosticism is a subset of atheism and not a different thing altogether. Either way, both of those worldviews do not posit a god so they certainly cannot be said to be theistic at all. Like I said:

A - theism.

without theism

ThePittman

Alfheim

inimalist
Originally posted by Alfheim
Im just taking your word for it. I thoughtb intellignet design was a scientific theory?

nope, thats just media propoganda

if you talk to the people at the discover institute (the number 1 ID think tank) and ask then what one experiment they would run to show ID, they have no answers. The theory has no predictive power and thus is useless in science.

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
When I say atheist I simply mean one who doesn't affirm the existence of any deity. Etymologically that seems to be the most sound way of putting it.

Either you believe in god or you don't. I think agnosticism is a subset of atheism and not a different thing altogether. Either way, both of those worldviews do not posit a god so they certainly cannot be said to be theistic at all. Like I said:

A - theism.

without theism

well

it depends if you want to use language in the academic sense or in the sense that allows you to communicate an idea to people

lord xyz
Originally posted by Alfheim
Er yeah you do a belief in no god is a belief. Also evngelical athiests disagree. A belief of what? You can't really believe in a negative.

Alfheim
Originally posted by inimalist
nope, thats just media propoganda

if you talk to the people at the discover institute (the number 1 ID think tank) and ask then what one experiment they would run to show ID, they have no answers. The theory has no predictive power and thus is useless in science.

I'll have to look into it.


Originally posted by lord xyz
A belief of what? You can't really believe in a negative.

Yeah you BELIEVE that God does not exist. That is a belief.

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
it depends if you want to use language in the academic sense or in the sense that allows you to communicate an idea to people

Huh?

Most people can't sum their beliefs up in one word anyway.

ThePittman

Ushgarak
"I see so not believing in something is not a belief? You do realise that doesnt make any sense? If you dont believe in God, you believe that God does not exist....thats a belief."

Crap. Your understanding of these concepts is very poor.

Atheism is NOT a belief in ANYTHING. It is simply the word used to describe someone whose beliefs, whatever they are, do not include a God.

This is a basic matter of understanding the English language.

Meanwhile, if Evangelcial Atheists, whstevber you exactly mean by them, choose to make their views a belief, then that is their business. But that's irrelevant. The word atheism itself is NOT a belief.

Alfheim

Ushgarak
Wow, I actually sound absolutely nothing like one at all. I do sound like someone who knows their English though.

You sound like someone who has to run away from an argument they are losing.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Wow, I actually sound absolutely nothing like one at all. I do sound like someone who knows their English though.

You sound like someone who has to run away from an argument they are losing.

Yeah and thats what Christains say as well. "You dont understand" or "Those people are not really Christians."

Well done.

ThePittman

lord xyz
Originally posted by Alfheim
I'll have to look into it.




Yeah you BELIEVE that God does not exist. That is a belief. Yeah, a belief of nothing. So we believe nothing.

Alfheim

ThePittman

lord xyz
Originally posted by Alfheim
If you say so.



It could be turned into a religon.




It could be.



Exactly. Thats a better response as opposed to "their wrong". roll eyes (sarcastic)



Whatever your right. I'd explain it to you if I wasn't lazy.

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
Huh?

Most people can't sum their beliefs up in one word anyway.

I agree with that, and anyone who can isn't worth listening to smile

my point was about language and usage. Sure, in its most academic and proper form, the prefix "a" followed by "theism" is a lack of belief in God. And in that way, all people who aren't of the specific religion you are speaking of are atheists, and I guess you could throw agnostics in there to.

However, when you get into the way that the term atheist and agnostic are used in society, especially within the groups who identify with it, it has a much more conventional and social meaning. Atheist is belief in no god, agnostic is undetermined.

I get your point, and I understand linguistic purism, but its not my sacred cow. (maybe the line between agnostic and atheist is stick out tongue)

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
Sure, in its most academic and proper form, the prefix "a" followed by "theism" is a lack of belief in God. And in that way, all people who aren't of the specific religion you are speaking of are atheists, and I guess you could throw agnostics in there to.

Not exactly. I don't think the validity of the belief really matters here. I don't believe there is such a being as the god of the Quran but I still count Muslims as theists rather than atheists because they believe it.

Alliance
Originally posted by Alfheim
What do you think of the views of this progam? This program is called The Trouble with Atheism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzLpx2nFTc0

I think this video makes a lot of flawed assumptions.

It suggests religion is somthing that is conditioned, something I'm not willing to back up. I don't have statistics, but its not a view on religion I've really heard before.

The idea that Atheism is a religion is completely proposterous. Even worse, They shoot a picture of Darwin and Origin of species as if this actually lends creidibility to atheism. Sorry, thats complete bullshit.

THe association of atheism with communism. Atheism has never been imposed as a theocracy. There has been no "athiest regime." None has ever been founded. England is more of an athiestic regime than the USSR.

Athiesm never tells anyone how to live thier lives. where did that idea come from?

And, just because you can interview a bunch of crazies, doesn't mean you have a point. This video is simply mass-produced propoganda. Real analysis comes from research and philosophy, of which I saw none in this video.

LOTS of people are crazy. Justbecause there are crazy athiests doesn't mean that their lunacy is caused by athiesm.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, this video creates a false choice. It assumes that because you are athiest, you are against all religions (or vice versa). This is simply not the case. Most people in the world can seperate thier religious belief from others. Athiests do the same.

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
Not exactly. I don't think the validity of the belief really matters here. I don't believe there is such a being as the god of the Quran but I still count Muslims as theists rather than atheists because they believe it.

stick out tongue

I would too

You can just get really bogged down in the specifics of language is all I'm sayin'

Alfheim

Bardock42
Look, your arguments are generally bullshit, how can you not see that. It is so blatantly obvious.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
Look, your arguments are generally bullshit, how can you not see that. It is so blatantly obvious.

Yeah of course anybody who disgrees with you is an idiot. Im an idiot, Rod is an idiot all those other people who think atheism is a belief are idiots as well. It would sound less "facist" if you said it was a matter of opinion.

Example of monotheism?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
Yeah of course anybody who disgrees with you is an idiot. Im an idiot, Rod is an idiot all those other people who think atheism is a belief are idiots as well. It would sound less "facist" if you said it was a matter of opinion.

Example of monotheism?

Don't you see that all you are saying is "That's a matter of opinion", it is not...there are fundamental differences between my and your argument, yours being based on idiotic and childish observation, while mine is actually comparing rationally.

Communism is not in the same way an atheistic system as Islam is a theist one. Every ****ing person that can halfway think would tell you that you are thinking wrong.

I have no clue why you do it either, apparently you are not conditioned to believe in a certain Religion, but still, you are not able to apply the most fundamental parts of logic to a topic. It is quite ridiculous to converse with you, as you do not understand the difference between your opinion and facts that are provided to show that your opinion is inaccurate.

And as I said before, Atheism is a belief. That sentence again shows your inabilitiy to comprehend what is put forward to you. You are a disgrace to the traditions of intellectual discourse.

An example of monotheism would be the Protestant Christian faith.

And maybe it would sound less fascist, but who cares, I am actually right, you may have an opinion, but whether it is correct is not a matter of it. You are wrong. As has been shown countless times. Just accept it...and don't forget...suicide can be the answer.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42


An example of monotheism would be the Protestant Christian faith.



Ok so why is it an example of montheism??? Islam is an example of montheism as well.....why are these examples of montheism????

Bardock42

Alfheim

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
Yeah you dont say they kill because of montheism thats just semantics, at the end of the day Communism is an example of atheism because one of its major "pillars" is atheism. Whatever you want to call Communism an ideology a belief system....WHATEVER....it is an atheistic example of a religon.

At the end of the day you can still not think

Communism relates to Atheism in a very, very different manner than Islam relates to Organized Religion that tells to kill.

Not sure how you don't see that, it even relates differently to theism, but again, why does it matter.

THINK. GOD DAMMIT, THINK FOR ONCE. I beg you.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
At the end of the day you can still not think

Communism relates to Atheism in a very, very different manner than Islam relates to Organized Religion that tells to kill.

Not sure how you don't see that, it even relates differently to theism, but again, why does it matter.

THINK. GOD DAMMIT, THINK FOR ONCE. I beg you.


No no no maybe I am thinking maybe your arrogant because there are lots of people who would agree with me. They are all idiots.....

At the end of the day Islam is an example of monthiesm because it main pillar is belief in one God.

Communism is an example of atheism because its main pillar is athiesm. Whats there to think about??????

I should just agree with you eventhough your contradicting yourself.

Communism states that religon is the opuim of the masses and should be got rid of...whats the problem...you splitting hairs?

So lets get this straight. Islam is a monthiestic religon because its amin belief is one god and it tells people to kill.

Communism is an atheistic belief system and tells people that religon should be gotten rid of but theres a difference?

Furthermore not everbody on this forum thinks that religon causes people to kill.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
No no no maybe I am thinking maybe your arrogant because there are lots of people who would agree with me. They are all idiots.....

Yes they are, in this aspect they are. Every single one of them.

Originally posted by Alfheim
At the end of the day Islam is an example of monthiesm because it main pillar is belief in one God.

No one denied that.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Communism is an example of atheism because its main pillar is athiesm. Whats there to think about??????

It does not have a belief in God, but it is not motivated by the lack of belief in God. I mean, Christ, a lamp is atheist. Communisms main pillar is NOT atheism. That is bullshit. Every scientist on the subject would tell you, but you would not understand, cause you think your wrong opinion is just as valid as facts. Stupid.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I should just agree with you eventhough your contradicting yourself.

I am not, you are just too dumb (fact) to understand what is actually happening. You can't even follow a conversation. But with one thing you are right, you should agree with me because I have reason and facts on my side.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Communism states that religon is the opuim of the masses and should be got rid of...whats the problem...you splitting hairs?

Marx stated that. Not communism, but it doesn't matter. One of the communist ideas is that Religion is bad, yes. What does it matter though? No atheist is saying certain Religions are bad because they are theistic. No one. You are again comparing incomparable things in your endless stupidity.


Originally posted by Alfheim
So lets get this straight. Islam is a monthiestic religon because its amin belief is one god and it tells people to kill.

N-no. You moron. Islam is a monotheistic Religion because it is a " set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." and has as it's core belief that there is only one God.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Communism is an atheistic belief system and tells people that religon should be gotten rid of but theres a difference?

Y-yes. Communism is atheist because it has no belief in God (that's a negative...everything is atheist by default...but that doesn't matter) it is again the belief system part that makes the problems, just like it is with Religion. That's why no one blames Theism. You try to blame atheism, but it makes no sense. Are you sooo stupid? Really? OR are you just a freaking troll that is there to drive me crazy with his nonsense?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Furthermore not everbody on this forum thinks that religon causes people to kill.

What does that matter? It is a fact that Religion does in some cases cause people to kill.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42


What does that matter? It is a fact that Religion does in some cases cause people to kill.

Ok I tell you what maybe i'll answer your post later. Answer these questions.

1. Religon causes people to kill because for example the Bible and the Quran tell them to. Yes or No?

2. When Religon tells people to seek knowledge Religon doesnt cause people to be more scientific. Yes or No?

ThePittman
Originally posted by Alfheim
Thats a matter of opinion.



Thats a matter of opinion. Furthermore why is Islam an example of montheism and Communism not an example of atheism?



Thats a matter of opinion thats like saying death metal isnt music.




Ok please explain how Islam is an example of Monotheism and then explain how Communism is NOT an example of Atheism.



Communism for starters.



Oh I see so because they have a different opinion to you there crazy. Arrogant? You also think Buddhists reject violence and chat bullocks about Islam but oh well.



Well ok if you apply that to religon as well you would be consistent.



it doesnt create a false choice your reading too much into it. Well first off the example of the toothpick I was talking about is not a matter of opinion, the toothpick was never supposed to be a religion or religious icon, it was a simple tool to take food out of your teeth, the fact that people decided to make it something else doesn't change that.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok I tell you what maybe i'll answer your post later. Answer these questions.

1. Religon causes people to kill because for example the Bible and the Quran tell them to. Yes or No?

2. When Religon tells people to seek knowledge Religon doesnt cause people to be more scientific. Yes or No?

If it does I am very much in favour of it. I just don't feel that many Religions did that over the course of history.

ThePittman
Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok I tell you what maybe i'll answer your post later. Answer these questions.

1. Religon causes people to kill because for example the Bible and the Quran tell them to. Yes or No?

2. When Religon tells people to seek knowledge Religon doesnt cause people to be more scientific. Yes or No? Both questions are phrased poorly and are leading but how they are phrased the answers would be no.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes they are, in this aspect they are. Every single one of them.



No one denied that.



It does not have a belief in God, but it is not motivated by the lack of belief in God. I mean, Christ, a lamp is atheist. Communisms main pillar is NOT atheism. That is bullshit. Every scientist on the subject would tell you, but you would not understand, cause you think your wrong opinion is just as valid as facts. Stupid.



I am not, you are just too dumb (fact) to understand what is actually happening. You can't even follow a conversation. But with one thing you are right, you should agree with me because I have reason and facts on my side.



Marx stated that. Not communism, but it doesn't matter. One of the communist ideas is that Religion is bad, yes. What does it matter though? No atheist is saying certain Religions are bad because they are theistic. No one. You are again comparing incomparable things in your endless stupidity.




N-no. You moron. Islam is a monotheistic Religion because it is a " set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." and has as it's core belief that there is only one God.



Y-yes. Communism is atheist because it has no belief in God (that's a negative...everything is atheist by default...but that doesn't matter) it is again the belief system part that makes the problems, just like it is with Religion. That's why no one blames Theism. You try to blame atheism, but it makes no sense. Are you sooo stupid? Really? OR are you just a freaking troll that is there to drive me crazy with his nonsense?



What does that matter? It is a fact that Religion does in some cases cause people to kill.

Im going to read the Communist manifesto and then think this over. Apparently the Communist manifesto does say religon is the opium of the masses.


Originally posted by ThePittman
Well first off the example of the toothpick I was talking about is not a matter of opinion, the toothpick was never supposed to be a religion or religious icon, it was a simple tool to take food out of your teeth, the fact that people decided to make it something else doesn't change that.

You do know they have holy shit in India? So because you disagree with them shit isnt holy?


Originally posted by Bardock42
If it does I am very much in favour of it. I just don't feel that many Religions did that over the course of history.

Well I pretty much told you that there are bexamples in religous scripture that tell people to seek knowledge. Even if you want to admit tthat relgion can cause people to kill you have to agree that religon can cause people to seek knoweldge if the scriptures tell them to. Its just being consistent.

Originally posted by ThePittman
Both questions are phrased poorly and are leading but how they are phrased the answers would be no.

I'll go with that.

Bardock42
I am not denying that Religions can bring people to seek knowledge I am denying that Religion did that in an adequate amount. I feel the good Religion has done is far outweighed by the bad.



Well, the communist Manifesto was written by Marx. But there is still a difference. Communism is a system that does anything because of atheism. It has different moral standards that cause it to do something. Islam is directly based on theism.

Basically the lack of God does not tell them to starve farmers in communism, while the belief in God tells them to kill non-believers.

I am being fair here, you on the other hand compare very different things.

ThePittman

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
I am not denying that Religions can bring people to seek knowledge I am denying that Religion did that in an adequate amount. I feel the good Religion has done is far outweighed by the bad.

Thats fair enough.


Originally posted by Bardock42

Well, the communist Manifesto was written by Marx. But there is still a difference. Communism is a system that does anything because of atheism. It has different moral standards that cause it to do something. Islam is directly based on theism.

Basically the lack of God does not tell them to starve farmers in communism, while the belief in God tells them to kill non-believers.

I am being fair here, you on the other hand compare very different things.

Well ok.....I think I do see your point and basically im going to have a long think about it.

The problem is like you said Communist is atheistic by default, as you said its no atheism thats making them do anything. For example its not like theres this guy called Athiest who said that Commmunist should kill people thats just the Communists doing that. Ok I understand right.

Ok im not going to say what I think just now. Im just going to read through as much as I can and give it some thought.

Alfheim

ThePittman

ThePittman

Alfheim

Bardock42

inimalist
Alf:

sort of regarding the "is atheism a religion" question:

by its strict definition, no it isn't. What you have done is given the word "religion" a definition that is something like "having no religion is a religion".

The problem then is that the word religion carries no meaning. If everything is a religion, then there is no purpose in even having a word for it. The point you are making is a very fun word play, but outside of linguistics, there is no real merit behind that idea.

ThePittman

Ytse
Originally posted by Bardock42
I feel the good Religion has done is far outweighed by the bad.

One point to consider is that most charities are not secular.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Ytse
One point to consider is that most charities are not secular.

Certainly.

Alfheim

ThePittman
Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok what about Buddhism? That existed before evangelical atheism. no expression I'm not sure what you are tying to say.

Ytse
Originally posted by Alfheim
With all these different defintions how can you decide what atheism was orginally meant to be?

http://www.etymonline.com/

smile

Alfheim
Originally posted by ThePittman
I'm not sure what you are tying to say.

I made some changes, I hope the additions help.

Furthermore there seems to be different ways of defining atheism. Some people see Agnostism as atheism and theres weak and strong atheism. With all these different defintions how can you decide what atheism was orginally meant to be?

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
http://www.etymonline.com/

smile

right, because people use the proper etymology of words when labeling things with linguistic symbols

like conservative, or incredible. The use of those hasn't changed one bit from their origins...

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
right, because people use the proper etymology of words when labeling things with linguistic symbols

like conservative, or incredible. The use of those hasn't changed one bit from their origins...

You're getting ahead of yourself, man. Read what I was quoting.

big grin

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
You're getting ahead of yourself, man. Read what I was quoting.

big grin

haha

I'd rather argue about the minutia of language than of atheism though!!!

Alfheim
Well ok your thingy says athiest means godless.

Wiki says its more complicated...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#Etymology


In early Ancient Greek, the adjective atheos (ἄθεος, from the privative ἀ- + θεός "god"wink meant "godless". The word acquired an additional meaning in the 5th century BCE, severing relations with the gods; that is, "denying the gods, ungodly", with more active connotations than asebēs, or "impious". Modern translations of classical texts sometimes translate atheos as "atheistic". As an abstract noun, there was also atheotēs (ἀθεότη&#962wink, "atheism". Cicero transliterated the Greek word into the Latin atheos. The term found frequent use in the debate between early Christians and pagans, with each side attributing it, in the pejorative sense, to the other.

for example atheist was seen as an abstract term...also it seems pagans and Christians called each other athiests.

Originally posted by inimalist

like conservative, or incredible. The use of those hasn't changed one bit from their origins...

It seems to be hard to track down what it orignally meant. It seems one of its early defintions was pagan.

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
I'd rather argue about the minutia of language than of atheism though!!!

Well, I think we basically agree about the word "atheism" when it comes down to it. That ultimately the one word doesn't tell you very much about who someone is. And even in rigorous debate you have to very clearly define your terms so atheist could end up carrying all sorts of nuance depending upon the context.

inimalist
Originally posted by Alfheim
Well ok your thingy says athiest means godless.

Wiki says its more complicated...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#Etymology


In early Ancient Greek, the adjective atheos (ἄθεος, from the privative ἀ- + θεός "god"wink meant "godless". The word acquired an additional meaning in the 5th century BCE, severing relations with the gods; that is, "denying the gods, ungodly", with more active connotations than asebēs, or "impious". Modern translations of classical texts sometimes translate atheos as "atheistic". As an abstract noun, there was also atheotēs (ἀθεότη&#962wink, "atheism". Cicero transliterated the Greek word into the Latin atheos. The term found frequent use in the debate between early Christians and pagans, with each side attributing it, in the pejorative sense, to the other.

for example atheist was seen as an abstract term...also it seems pagans and Christians called each other athiests.

thats the whole thing about language. You can reduce and manipulate it until the qualifications and definitions fit the point you are trying to make.

I could very easily postulate that every person on the planet is an atheist because they don't believe in a deity that I just invented. They are, in a very specific sense, atheists, depending on how you want to manipulate the term.

The question must then be, what does the word "atheist" represent when we use it in language. What real thing is it the symbolic abstraction for. And in modern times, it has come to be used to describe those who, for whatever philosophical tradition, do believe in a very specific interpretation of God.

To say that the lack of ideology represents a uniting ideology, again as I said before, makes the term ideology itself moot, but also would be akin to saying that not being American is a nationality. That is how ethnocentric your view on atheism is.

The only way "atheism" looks like a belief system is if you suppose that The question of God is one that deserves to be addressed by intelligent people. More than anything though, you are excusing the many different intellectual pathways to atheism and massively diverse ideological spectrum of beliefs that atheists have.

Alfheim
Furthermor even if you dont think that Communism is an example of atheism. According to some defintions of atheism Communism could come under weak atheism by default.

Its still seems to me what atheism is a matter of opinion. Hell the word didnt even seem to orginally mean neccessarily no-belief in god. Sometimes it was used as an insult and used to describe pagans.

srug

Alfheim
Originally posted by inimalist


The only way "atheism" looks like a belief system is if you suppose that The question of God is one that deserves to be addressed by intelligent people. More than anything though, you are excusing the many different intellectual pathways to atheism and massively diverse ideological spectrum of beliefs that atheists have.

EXACTLY! Well ok are you saying its a matter of opinion and its subjective?

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
Well, I think we basically agree about the word "atheism" when it comes down to it. That ultimately the one word doesn't tell you very much about who someone is. And even in rigorous debate you have to very clearly define your terms so atheist could end up carrying all sorts of nuance depending upon the context.

absolutely

atheism is more of a "catch all" or even slander than it is a label that provides any information about someone.

There are lots of reasons I don't like the word, the whole definition thing is certainly one of them.

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
absolutely

Though I would argue that at the most stripped down it nearly always (barring some pejorative uses) means that one doesn't affirm the existence of any god(s).

inimalist
Originally posted by Alfheim
Furthermor even if you dont think that Communism is an example of atheism. According to some defintions of atheism Communism could come under weak atheism by default.


I don't get this analogy.

Communism doesn't make a claim about whether God exists or not. Marx wasn't so much an atheist as he was against the power and authority of the church and many communist regimes have institutionalized either religions that existed prior to the revolution or have adopted new rituals and symbols, making the party or leader into what in any other case would be considered a religion.

Communists are communists. It IS a belief system all its own.

ThePittman

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
Though I would argue that at the most stripped down it nearly always (barring some pejorative uses) means that one doesn't affirm the existence of any god(s).

In my understanding it is the denial of those Gods that is important, but thats such a splitting of hairs.

However, there a lots of both agnostics and atheists out there that would hate to be lumped together like that. They seem to have a lot of animosity for each other, which is strange and funny in some strange ways.

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
In my understanding it is the denial of those Gods that is important, but thats such a splitting of hairs.

Well, I'm not saying it isn't important but that it could be accurate to say since both lack theism they are atheistic.



Probably because people have a tendency to generalize based on words like this.

Alfheim

inimalist
Marx after the age of 23 denied being an atheist.

Opium of the people was coined by theorists before Marx who were much more radically atheist than he, and Marx's use of the term relates to how religion as an organization manipulates people and forces them to suffer for mythology. He was very much against the power of the church, and not the idea of some deity existing. For this reason Marx is better know as an anti-authoritarian rather than as an atheist (which is strange considering how authoritarian communism is in practice)

inimalist
Originally posted by Ytse
Well, I'm not saying it isn't important but that it could be accurate to say since both lack theism they are atheistic.


I just don't like that context

to say "lacking theism" in many ways assumes that theism is something to have or that it is the natural or default of man.

Not being a theist, I may just be overly defensive, but to use "atheism" to describe the lack of something just seems overly prejudicial and biased toward theology in it's definition.

It could be accurate, and I'd probably never try to correct someone on its use outside of a forum made for arguing with people, but ya, it just seems to me that the definition of atheism shouldn't be so conditional on "lacking" something. /sigh language.

Ytse
Originally posted by inimalist
to say "lacking theism" in many ways assumes that theism is something to have or that it is the natural or default of man.

It would be curious if it worked the other way. How would you put it? Atheism and A-atheism? Hehe.

As far as I'm concerned it's just the way the language has grown and doesn't show any preference.

ThePittman

Alliance
Originally posted by Alfheim
Thats a matter of opinion thats like saying death metal isnt music. No. its not a matter of opinion and you have sh*t to back it up.




Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok please explain how Islam is an example of Monotheism and then explain how Communism is NOT an example of Atheism.

Monothiesm describes a type of religion. Islam is one. Athiesm describes a belief, that communism is not an example of.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Communism for starters.
umm...all i can say is bullshit? The Cold War is over. Chill out and try learning.


Originally posted by Alfheim
Oh I see so because they have a different opinion to you there crazy. Arrogant? You also think Buddhists reject violence and chat bullocks about Islam but oh well.
Thats not true at all. If you actually learned about my views instead of simply bashing me, you'd actually be able to see that.
Originally posted by Alfheim
Well ok if you apply that to religon as well you would be consistent. I do.

Originally posted by Alfheim
it doesnt create a false choice your reading too much into it. And your mindless and unjustified oversimplification is a blatant logical fallacy.

lil bitchiness
He's saying what I made a thread on.

Certain atheists (as shown in video) which behave in the way theists do -

Atheism is not one of the ways of understanding the world - it is the ONLY way.
Theists are simply wrong/stupid/brainwashed - as few of them said in the movie.

Which sounds like the theists and their talk about God.

However, this person evidently had an agenda when he made the movie, so, it appears like he has carefully selected atheists who voice their opinion in the arrogant manner, implying that everyone else who is not atheist is stupid/brainwashed.

There are scientists, professors, thinkers...etc who do not discard the idea of God, or behaive in an argotant way towards anyone else who believes in God.

JesusIsAlive
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
He's saying what I made a thread on.

Certain atheists (as shown in video) which behave in the way theists do -

Atheism is not one of the ways of understanding the world - it is the ONLY way.
Theists are simply wrong/stupid/brainwashed - as few of them said in the movie.

Which sounds like the theists and their talk about God.

However, this person evidently had an agenda when he made the movie, so, it appears like he has carefully selected atheists who voice their opinion in the arrogant manner, implying that everyone else who is not atheist is stupid/brainwashed.

There are scientists, professors, thinkers...etc who do not discard the idea of God, or behaive in an argotant way towards anyone else who believes in God.

Theists are simply wrong/stupid/brainwashed?

I wonder what makes you write this? You have just classified all people who (intelligently and after careful examination and thoughtful process) come to the sound conclusion that God exists, wrong, stupid and brainwashed.

sad

ThePittman
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive


I wonder what makes you write this? JIA? wink

lil bitchiness
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Theists are simply wrong/stupid/brainwashed?

I wonder what makes you write this? You have just classified all people who (intelligently and after careful examination and thoughtful process) come to the sound conclusion that God exists, wrong, stupid and brainwashed.

sad

I am explaining what the people in the documentary are saying. I don't think theists are brainwashed, stupid or wrong.

lord xyz
Originally posted by inimalist
Marx after the age of 23 denied being an atheist.

Opium of the people was coined by theorists before Marx who were much more radically atheist than he, and Marx's use of the term relates to how religion as an organization manipulates people and forces them to suffer for mythology. He was very much against the power of the church, and not the idea of some deity existing. For this reason Marx is better know as an anti-authoritarian rather than as an atheist (which is strange considering how authoritarian communism is in practice) Makes sense. Marx being an atheist is kinda dumb since he thought up a government where one person rules everyone else respectively.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Theists are simply wrong/stupid/brainwashed?

I wonder what makes you write this? You have just classified all people who (intelligently and after careful examination and thoughtful process) come to the sound conclusion that God exists, wrong, stupid and brainwashed.

sad You came to that conclusion by what everyone around you believed and wanted you to believe. YOU are wrong, stupid and brianwashed.

JesusIsAlive
Originally posted by lord xyz
Makes sense. Marx being an atheist is kinda dumb since he thought up a government where one person rules everyone else respectively.

You came to that conclusion by what everyone around you believed and wanted you to believe. YOU are wrong, stupid and brianwashed.

I haven't always believed that the Bible was God's Word, so you are wrong again.

big grin

Goddess Kali
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I haven't always believed that the Bible was God's Word, so you are wrong again.

big grin


What convinced you ?



You never answered my question about how you became Christian...

FeceMan
It does little to convince. It is only through being called.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
What convinced you ?



You never answered my question about how you became Christian...

Do you really expect him to tell you the truth? His job is to convert people at all costs, not tell you anything about himself.

JesusIsAlive
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
What convinced you ?



You never answered my question about how you became Christian...


Read all of my posts to Strangelove in the thread entitled, "Can you handle the Truth?" Start on page 2. I guarantee everything that you want to know is in those posts.

lord xyz
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I haven't always believed that the Bible was God's Word, so you are wrong again.

big grin I never said you always believed. I said you believed because of everyone else around believed. You told me this in PMs.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Do you really expect him to tell you the truth? His job is to convert people at all costs, not tell you anything about himself. I asked him in PMs, and he told me. wink

lil bitchiness
Originally posted by lord xyz
Makes sense. Marx being an atheist is kinda dumb since he thought up a government where one person rules everyone else respectively.

You came to that conclusion by what everyone around you believed and wanted you to believe. YOU are wrong, stupid and brianwashed.

No, that is way off.

Marx idea of government was AGAINST single person ruling. The whole idea behind communism is that there are no ''rulling classes'' or ''elite''. People rule themselves.

Thats why Russia, China, Cuba...etc. are and were NOT communist, but dictatiorship governments.

Voltaire was right about God though - If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.

leonheartmm
atheism isnt a belief system. nough said. its simply the characteristic of ALL INDIVIDUALS who DONT believe in god. other than that they DO have their own belief systems quite independant from atheism WHICH are responsible for their acts. atheism isnt a causitive factor, its the OTHER BELIEFS which come in place of THEISM that are the causitive factors of all the good and bad that the atheist does. theism on the other hand is the direct causitive factor for many many things which are mostly negetivr so theyr not on even ground.

Boris
What a silly program.

JesusIsAlive
Originally posted by lord xyz
I never said you always believed. I said you believed because of everyone else around believed. You told me this in PMs.

I asked him in PMs, and he told me. wink

You are putting words in my mouth. I never said anything remotely close to, "I believed because of everyone else around believed." I went back and checked the pms I never said those words that you allege that I said. You kept asking me with why I believe and I told you just I like I have told everyone else: read my posts in the thread entitled, "Can You Handle The Truth?" starting on page 2. That is the truth.

Devil King
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You are putting words in my mouth.

I've got something to put in your mouth. Jesus would be pleased.

JesusIsAlive
Originally posted by Devil King
I've got something to put in your mouth. Jesus would be pleased.

Devil King, I thought you were over being bitter looks like I was wrong.

confused

Alfheim

Alfheim
Originally posted by Alfheim



If Communism isnt im sure Communism would be an exammple of atheism.


Sorry thats a typos thats supposed to be Satanism is an example of atheism

lil bitchiness
Martial arts are supposed to be for self defense only. Thats the first thing they teach you, before anything else.

And to be honest, Satanism these days are just bunch of kids trying to spite Christians, or something lame like that, where all their dogma relies on Christian dogma - but opposite. You like God, I like Devil. Oooooo.

Im sure there are real satanists, independent of Christian type dogma. If anyone has any real info on them, when they started, what they believe...etc, please post.

ThePittman
Originally posted by Alfheim
Yeah ok your right I looked it up again. In that acse though Satanism would come under atheism because they dont belive in God or Gods. Actually to believe in Satan you would have to believe in God as well, doesn't mean you worship him but you would have to believe in God if you believed in Satan.

Alfheim
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Martial arts are supposed to be for self defense only. Thats the first thing they teach you, before anything else.


Well yeah still involves violence. Violence should only be inself defense.


Originally posted by ThePittman
Actually to believe in Satan you would have to believe in God as well, doesn't mean you worship him but you would have to believe in God if you believed in Satan.

Nah man they dont. I know its called Satanism but they dont belive he exists he is just a fictional role-model.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
Well yeah still involves violence. Violence should only be inself defense.




Nah man they dont. I know its called Satanism but they dont belive he exists he is just a fictional role-model.

Well, but what horrible deeds are Satanists all over the world responsible for? Does that even cover 9/11?

Alfheim
Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, but what horrible deeds are Satanists all over the world responsible for? Does that even cover 9/11?

Nah man Satanists havent done **** really. You might have the odd nutcase here and there. My point was Communism isnt an example of atheism (still to read up on Communism before I decide for myself) but im just simply trying to find an example of what could be considered to be a correct example of atheism.

I didnt give an example of Satanism in the sense that they have commited atrocities im just trying to find a correct example.

ThePittman
Originally posted by Alfheim
Well yeah still involves violence. Violence should only be inself defense. Depends on your definition of violence, with Aikido it is purely self defense.



Originally posted by Alfheim

Nah man they dont. I know its called Satanism but they dont belive he exists he is just a fictional role-model. Well I would have to admit that I don't know much about Satanism but how could you believe in Satan without God because God created Satan? The whole story and origin of Satan was around God so how could he be without him?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alfheim
Nah man Satanists havent done **** really. You might have the odd nutcase here and there. My point was Communism isnt an example of atheism (still to read up on Communism before I decide for myself) but im just simply trying to find an example of what could be considered to be a correct example of atheism.

I didnt give an example of Satanism in the sense that they have commited atrocities im just trying to find a correct example.

Well, it is atheist if it does not believe in a God figure. But it is not really a religion.

Alfheim
Originally posted by ThePittman
Depends on your definition of violence, with Aikido it is purely self defense.

Yeah. Whats worng with that. My point is they dont reject violence.


Originally posted by ThePittman

Well I would have to admit that I don't know much about Satanism but how could you believe in Satan without God because God created Satan? The whole story and origin of Satan was around God so how could he be without him?

Well thats what im saying. They think its all fiction. It like for example if you got some people who worshipped Pitt as an example of how to behave.

Yeah the characters not real but I guess it could still inspire you to do certain thing. It might sound silly but thats how it is. srug


Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, it is atheist if it does not believe in a God figure. But it is not really a religion.

Well they do have the Satanic Bible and I think they have their own rituals.

lil bitchiness
Alfheim, I don't think you looked closely into the history of martial arts and buddhism.

Alfheim
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Alfheim, I don't think you looked closely into the history of martial arts and buddhism.

Why do you say that? sad Well im no expert.

lil bitchiness
cry sorry, I didn;t mean it.

Alfheim
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
cry sorry, I didn;t mean it.

Oh ok.... confused

Bardock42
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
cry sorry, I didn;t mean it.

You behave weirdly. Are you okay?

ThePittman
Originally posted by Alfheim
Yeah. Whats worng with that. My point is they dont reject violence. Well that was my question, it depends on what you consider violence, if you are defending yourself from an attacker is that violence?



Originally posted by Alfheim

Well thats what im saying. They think its all fiction. It like for example if you got some people who worshipped Pitt as an example of how to behave.

Yeah the characters not real but I guess it could still inspire you to do certain thing. It might sound silly but thats how it is. srug Now I think you are over generalizing the belief, I seriously doubt that the core of Satanism all believe that God was made up. I have talked with a few before and they believed in God but not the accounting that was in the Bible, but Satan is of equal power as God.

Alfheim
Originally posted by ThePittman
Well that was my question, it depends on what you consider violence, if you are defending yourself from an attacker is that violence?

Well anyway it was in response to somebody who said Buddhits reject violence. I thought that was a stupid statement also Shaky who is a Buddhist thouigh so as well. I think the person was implying Buddhists were pacifists.


Originally posted by ThePittman

Now I think you are over generalizing the belief, I seriously doubt that the core of Satanism all believe that God was made up. I have talked with a few before and they believed in God but not the accounting that was in the Bible, but Satan is of equal power as God.

Well there are different sects those might be Luciferians and there are also "righteous" satanist who belive that Satan will come back.

Im talking about Satanism founded by Anton de Lavey (I think thats how you spell it).

There you go.

http://altreligion.about.com/library/weekly/aa052003a.htm

Religious Satanists

Religious Satanism is comprised of many varying groups and beliefs. Most religious Satanists are committed to a particular group or theology, but beliefs vary widely. The majority of religious Satanists belong to groups such as the Church of Satan, who do not believe in the existence of Satan as a deity. In fact, one of the main tenets of religious Satanism is individual determinism- Satan serves more as a mascot of individual liberty and freedom from false morality than as a deity. Shared by most religious Satanists is the idea that Christianity is flawed, that morality is not absolute, and that man is purely responsible for his own actions.

inimalist
why are you trying to prove that satanists are atheists?

the brights movement self-identifies with atheism, why are you trying to impose atheism on groups that have a negative social connotation? It would appear that you are trying to associate atheism with other things you dislike.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>