Very interesting...

Very good point Chuk. (Emphasis mine.)

 

No push to shove...just analyzing words and phrases and opinions - because this is what this all really boils down to...and truly no one is wrong when it comes to an opinion. I think everyone would get a long better in these types of threads as well as the world if they could get past that.


...and Kai - the word Atheist is shrouded in negativity. I think more positivity needs to be injected into it.


"someone who denies the existence of god"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

"Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively disbelieving in the existence of deities. In antiquity, Epicureanism incorporated aspects of atheism, but it disappeared from the philosophy of the Greek and Roman traditions as Christianity gained influence. ..."
"en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist"

"one who believes that there is no God. (atheism)"
www.summit.org/resource/dictionary/

"A person whose worldview embraces Atheism [noun] [OW]. The natural condition of all humans at birth and prior to indoctrination in or self-invention of Theism. Atheists claim there is no proof for God. "Strong" Atheists claim God does not exist. "Weak" Atheists do not deny the possibility of God, or that proof might eventually be discovered. Athiest and Athesit are Fundie synonyms of Atheist [SD]. The word Atheism [CE] derives from the Greek atheos, a = without, theos = God."
members.aol.com/porchnus/dict01.htm

"A person for whom the idea of god is senseless. Not to be confused with a person who hates (and neccessarily believes in the existence of) god."
www.angelfire.com/pa/ebrownle2/gloss.html

The last one I didn't pick up as strongly on the negative vibes...but it's there.

 

...and Hamma I couldn't agree more. There must be a separation of church and state.

Leave the preaching to the religious heads - I want my leaders to do whats best for the people and not let their beliefs impact their decision making.

Draw from it...don't force it.

 

Black Drop, atheism is not a belief. It is the disbelief of a certain belief. It is not someone who denies the existence of god, it is someone who disagrees with the assertion that a god exists. Of course it will seem negative, especially to the believer. The only thing atheism implies is that the individual does not believe in GODS. Period. If I reject an idea I find rediculous, am I a negative person? The words you bolded were indeed negatives, but did they really have negative "vibes" to them as well? From my point of view, religious people have made claims which they cannot support outside of their own writings, wild claims that only work if you accept the wild assertion as true to begin with. I chose to not believe it. That is atheism.

So what is negative about it?

I dare say this negativity you are sensing was put in place systematically by the people against the argument of atheism.

Something you should also notice, is that theists have always been the first to put a negative spin on something. Satanists are a perfect example of just how horribly Christians (among others) can contort a competing belief to make it look evil. I'm not well versed in the teachings of Satanism, but I think they believe God is actually the evil egotistical tyrant and Satan was the "freedom fighter". Either way, they are not evil, they are just seen as such by the "righteous" sheep.

 

just as most christians are considered "righetous" sheep by those who dont' follow...adhere to the beliefs of christianity?

damnit..i swore i wasn't going here...gaahh

 

Don't put words in my mouth test. I don't judge people based on their religious/non religious belief. Some do however, especially Christans. We live in a Christian nation, and recent surveys show that roughly 77% of the nation would not vote for an atheist to be president, because they were atheist. I'd say the proof is in the pudding. So yes, Christians are more prone to catch the "righteous sheep" syndrome than others, but not all necessarily do. I won't call someone a righteous sheep until they have shown to me they have the qualifications to be called such.

Any thoughts?

 

woah..no i wasn't trying to put words in your mouth...i was just asking a question..

forget it...not worth it..have fun with this one...

 

Ouch, harsh.

 

I've read through these posts, and have heard some nice debate.
My response. Don't believe everything you read.
God is in the math. Mathematics are involved in every process in the universe. We figure out the math, we see the design.
Large religious organizations are inherently dangerous. I could pick out several inquisitions over the years to back that up. Just have a different view on life, do some math. Someone with a holy book will want to burn you for it.
Humans are fallible, the books we have written for our religions are fallible. The truth is in the math. This is where god's design lies.

 

btw, women in my age group are hard to argue with eh kaikou
Not only are they smart and subtle in their actions, they have nice curves. Dangerous combination! If they can't convince you one way, they will with the other lol.
Never date a woman under 30, she isn't finished yet

 

God *could* be in the math, that is indeed the argument to end all arguments. But it is also an argument that can never be proved beyond speculation. It would take a "leap of faith" for the individual to accept this proposal, even if mankind had a complete understanding of the universe. It is an assumption with more assumptions as backup. That is, ideas with no validity beyond the hypothetical. But if God is hypothetical, why is everyone so convinced of his actual existence? False evidence? Misinterpretation? Thousands of years of believers passing down said false evidence/misinterpretations? Promises of eternal wonderment in the afterlife after a life of servitude to said hypothetical being? When something is largely exempt from logic (i.e. God.) what is keeping imaginative minds from bolstering the idea with little tidbits of their own imagination added into the great list of "God's greatness"? Just as kids compare their imaginary friends/super heroes/whatevers, sooner or later their character will reach the infinite point, immune to logic itself, and able to do anything and everything... I'm talking this thing can shoot lasers from its eyes *AND* control ESP-sensitive sharks with machine guns mounted on their fins, AT THE SAME TIME!

It is all too convenient to observe a natural universe's formation, but then tack a "God did it" onto the end result. That's why I brought up the rainbow colored diety lion point, because they are just as likely to be behind it all as the Christian's hypothesis of a god is. No, I'm not aware of any sons of the rainbow lions dying on a cross for man's sins, but martyr's blood is quite powerful. A god doesn't have to die to move people. I'm sure Jesus knew this quite well. He sacrificed himself for the future of Christianity, not the sins of man. Think about it, Christianity went from a heretical cult to a major religion with this martyr's blood. He accomplished his goal quite nicely. I wonder if the next big religion is already out there as a fledgeling cult right now that will spark when their leader is martyred for his beliefs... Not like it hasn't happened before, right?

My question is, if God does not interact with the environment (I understand some *want* God's presence more active, so they feel he does in fact interact with the environment), and simply put a set of rules in place that we see as the laws of nature, and let the universe take its course, why is God so important? If man causes so much suffering as a result of religion, why can't religion be put aside? I understand that this is akin to Rax Nahali's individual belief, so I suppose the question is more or less directed at you.

 

Here's my take. I've read, and believe I understand your arguement. In truth, I don't take issue with much if anything you've said.
I also feel that intelligent design is very much a part of "the math". Which I believe god(s) has put into motion.
(on a side note, I have a hard time believing that the greeks, romans, inca's, egyptians etc. Didn't believe fervently in the gods they worshipped. What if they were right? At one time christians were the pagans....lol. God is all about where you are in time and place. Perspective if you will. But I'm getting off topic.)
There is a great big multiverse out there. IN THEORY.
couple of universes come together and BANG. Our universe starts taking shape. Supermassive blackholes form, create stars, which in turn form into galaxies. After all is said and done, our planet manages to form what we call intelligent life. Act of god? Sure! Law of averages being used? Sure! We are the lottery winners in the galactic game of life. There are more winners out there, that is for sure.
I see the science behind what I've written here as proof of Intelligent design. I see religious texts as building blocks for a society that needs to get along with one another.
Others see them as the history of the world, the universe, and everything. Replacing sound thinking and mathematics with their version of things.
I could write for a long time about this. So I'll stop here and let you tear it up

 

I agree completely. Religious teachings would do wonders for society if the followers would simply get off their high horses of "my supernatural is real" and take religious texts as they were probably meant to be taken: Metaphorically. The entire story of Adam and Eve is a great insight to how mankind gained consciousness, METAPHORICALLY. It explains the transition homo-sapiens went through to gain self-awareness. NO, there was no garden with a tree full of forbidden fruit that would give man the ability to know good from evil when injested. And NO a god did not really create two humans and stick them in said garden to be tempted by a snake into eating a fruit. It is all a metaphor people decided to take way too literally. The story becomes substantially more thought provoking when you don't tie it down with literal meanings.

As for your take on the topic, Rax Nahali, I respect your view completely. Your desire to pursue an intellectual understanding of your surroundings isn't clouded by indoctrinated ideas, and more importantly, isn't egocentric to a certain group of believers. I think there is an inherent fear of one day realizing God may not be real that keeps many religious people's eyes shut tight as you described. To them, it would be called "devotion to faith". Extremists. You don't have to be a car bomber in Iraq screaming Allah to be classified as an extremist. The Al-qaeda terrorists are active extremists, a significant following of the Christian faith could be classified as passive extremists. I don't mean for that to be a cheap shot by using christians and al-qaeda extremists in the same sentence, but what is so different about a group trying to unify the world under Allah enforced by the laws of Sharia and a group trying to unify the world under God enforced by the laws of Moses? Hmmmmm? The motive is identical.

On a side note, have you read up on string theory/M-theory at all Rax Nahali? It is fascinating, and coincides with the possibility of a multiverse, and that we are just one membrane of a universe floating in an ocean of other membranes of universes, and when the membranes collide, matter forms, which may very well answer that stubborn question of how our universe began, and probably turn physics on its head in the process. I like string theory. To be able to think of the universe and all of the matter in it as a sort of galactic "song" being played out as the strings vibrate is a really cool and elegant concept. That our universe could be one of an infinite number of other "songs" each with their own set of unique properties and physics is quite humbling as well. But just because there are things out there I doubt I could ever understand, doesn't mean an unseen being of omnipotence is responsible for them. Sure the possibility exists, but it is one possibility in an endless sea of other possibilities. Even so, it is unnecessary to acknowledge this being to further my understanding of the universe, or to live a better life, so either way works for me.


This just surfaced over at the debate forums at beliefnet.com and I feel it conincides nicely with my views of "faith". May be a tad bit off topic, but it has its relevance to the topic as a whole. He gets a little worked up towards the end, but the guy almost mirrors my views of the word "faith" among other ideas.

Why does faith deserve respect?

Enough so in fact that I updated my forum signature below.

Another funny clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkhQLt1vbWU

 

Interesting. I must be thinking of a different branch of Satanism. Perhaps I was thinking of Luciferian Satanism? Or is that the branch that coincides with what you posted? Why is it called Satanism if Satan isn't involved? Or is he, just in a less literal sense? I also understand there is a branch called LaVeyan Satanism which is apparently the most popular of the Satanisms. I'm not sure what differences there are between them all.

 

I see, very enlightening, I have no beef with satanists, hell I guess I'd be classified as one, unless it goes beyond embracing your own humanity. I like the term Humanism.

Another very interesting find (if you've got the time to sit through the two hours):

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

I'm watching it right now, so far it has been fascinating. Lots of factual info in regards to how the concept of religion began, and the misinterpretations passed down in Christianity. For starters it talks about the sun and how it was mankind's first god. It then goes on to explain that most of the gods worshipped today stem from that original sun god. It also compares the vast array of messiahs throughout human history and how they all share very similar characteristics: Born by a virgin on the 25th of december, 3 kings following the eastern star to find the messiah (I'll explain how it all was misinterpreted in a minute), who was accompanied by 12 deciples and would wander around performing miracles. Water to wine being a particular one of those miracles. A vast majority of the messiahs, after death, stayed dead for 3 days, and then resurrected. Many were known as the "king of kings" "alpha and omega" etc. Jesus is the most recent of these Messiahs.

Looking at ancient astrology, the three stars that make up orions belt have always been referred to as the three kings. Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, the "star in the east", and the sun being the misinterpreted "SON" of god. Now, you know the whole "3 kings followed the eastern star to find the son of god"? Those three stars appear to be "following" (lined up with) Sirius, the eastern star, and on December 25th, those four stars align with the sunrise. The three kings follow the eastern star to find the birth of the SUN. There was also talk of Bethlehem translating into "House of bread", which was another name for the constellation Virgo, not a place on earth. Here's where the crazy part comes in though. The sun, throughout the winter solstice months, gets lower and lower in the sky, and the days grow shorter. Ancients saw this as the process of death. On December 22nd however, the sun stops moving south along the horizon and reaches its lowest point. For the next three days it does not seem to move (it does, just not noticably). For that three day duration, the sun is positioned below a constellation known as Crux, the southern cross. On December 25th, the sun stops moving south, and moves one degree north, foreshadowing longer days, warmth, and spring. This is how the idea "the "son" died on the cross, remained dead for three days, only to be reborn on the fourth." came about. This is also why many messiahs share this particular trait. Astrology, my friends, was the basis of religious beginnings. Oh, and by the way, the signs of the zodiac, the astrological life-cycle of the sun, there are 12. The SUN (jesus) travels about with 12 disciples (constellations). Another astrological reference, fabricated by man, far before Jesus existed. Take it as you will.

I highly suggest you check this movie out, religious or not. It will at least give some historical insight to primitive man and religion.

 

My goodness it just gets better and better. All of the end of the world stuff, that also has astrological links. Badly misinterpreted of course. Seriously, check this movie out.