What do you do when people mock/criticize your religion?

[Rowan]

Everyone is free to believe what they want to believe. That doesn't make them stupid or arrogant for believing differently. What makes someone arrogant, and I've seen it multiple times in this thread in the last day or so, is the inability to grasp that by thrusting their beliefs on to someone and telling them why they're wrong.

No one is wrong in what they believe. I don't believe in God, but my friend could believe in Him. I'm not going to call them out on bullshit, because they're free to believe it and whatever the **** they want; if they believe in unicorns and fairies, then all the more for them. I can say that I don't agree and why that's the case, and that's all I can really say. Because I don't believe that they're wrong.

They'd only be wrong if they tried to push it on to me, and tell me why I'm wrong. I don't think God would be happy if people pushed their beliefs on to everyone, because you're supposed to come to him through faith - not by order.

Meier isn't here yet, so I'd also like this thread to go back to a sense of normality before he comes back and opens an epic can of whoop-ass. No more flaming. Dunno what that is? Go and read the rules again. Please?

quote me where i've said someone is wrong for believing in god.

[Unknown Entity]

quote me where i've said someone is wrong for believing in god.

You're doing it without realising by thrusting your opinion about in the thread by continuing to post why you think someone is being arrogant about their belief. You're not outwardly telling people that they're wrong, but your "challenges" are coming off that way, and that's why people might be getting offended.

You're not the only one my post was aimed at. I'm not getting into an argument with you here, in this thread either. I asked for it to go back on topic, and I believe I asked nicely.

Topic: what do you do when someone mocks/criticises your religion.

[Selcopa]

Learn to not get trolled irl.
Seriously people when people criticize my beliefs I just let them know that I really don't care about their opinion, and it is irrelevant as mine when it comes to being sure about it.

Plus I just can sit there knowing they're going to burn in my hell because their gods and heaven don't exist.

btw sucks to be you guys doesnt it atheists?
If your religion is right you don't get to goto heaven, and if its wrong you still goto my hell

[Alpha]

On reflection, I think a more interesting question would be: "what do you do when somebody does not understand/misrepresents your religion?"

Because that is all this thread has become, aside from Heartless Angel's posts.

[Heartless Angel]

Because that is all this thread has become, aside from Heartless Angel's posts.

=]

On reflection, I think a more interesting question would be: "what do you do when somebody does not understand/misrepresents your religion?"

That actually is an interesting question. My answer to it, can be seen in the past two pages or so. I argue. I do this partially, because I believe it's the best way to make my beliefs understood, while simultaneously defending them against attack. Partially because I just really enjoy a good argument. Win or lose, I can almost always walk away with greater knowledge than I had before. I find the process as a whole immensely useful, and fulfilling.

[smurphy]

btw sucks to be you guys doesnt it atheists?
If your religion is right you don't get to goto heaven, and if its wrong you still goto my hell

Au contraire mon ami. If I was to apply the logic of an atheist and disregarded the opinions of those I am critiquing as you have just done, I would say it sucks to be religious as you spend (a non existent)god knows how many hours worshipping and fearing your deity of choice whereas atheists are not concerned with the (lack of an) afterlife and just try to achieve as much as possible within this short timespan we have on this earth.

This is how I react to peoples misconceptions of atheism. I try to tell people that the same logic does not apply because we do not have the same aims in life as those who have a religion do. Religious people act under the assumption they will be judged and there will be an afterlife so they act accordingly. Atheism frees you to make the most of your life. I admit it lacks the discipline that religion brings but the pros outweigh the cons.

[Unknown Entity]

btw sucks to be you guys doesnt it atheists?
If your religion is right you don't get to goto heaven, and if its wrong you still goto my hell

I wasn't aware that being an atheist was a "religion". Why are some religious folk so caught up in their own religion, that they cannot fathom the understanding that there's people who claim to not have one? Atheism is the belief of the absence of a God in this world - that's it. We don't worship what we consider to be a fact. To quote a wise person: "Atheism is a religion in exactly the same way as not collecting stamps is a hobby."

There's no heaven and hell argument either. Death is what it is. Death. You're born, you live, and then you die. There's room for spirituality in atheism too, I guess, but nothing remotely similar to heaven or hell.

In a way, I think it sucks for you religious guys. At least I can sleep happy knowing exactly what's going to happen to me when I die, instead of fretting over existence in heaven or hell.

On reflection, I think a more interesting question would be: "what do you do when somebody does not understand/misrepresents your religion?"

I think I demonstrated that already.

[Rowan]

On reflection, I think a more interesting question would be: "what do you do when somebody does not understand/misrepresents your religion?"

Because that is all this thread has become, aside from Heartless Angel's posts.

explain? I fail to see the point you're making. How have I misrepresented HER religion? ive only asked the question why she believes what she does, and all of a sudden im an offensive, ignorant person who doesnt understand anything? Alpha?

[Judge Magistrate]

I don't really care about other peoples religion. I only wanted Rown to leave Firefly alone. I don't try to pick fights with or argue with anyone who doesn't agree with me. I just don't like when people ask for an explanation, but don't like the explanation. I shall make a public apology to Rowan, but I don't want her bothering me or Firefly. That's all I ask


I'm sorry Rowan

[Rowan]

I don't really care about other peoples religion. I only wanted Rown to leave Firefly alone. I don't try to pick fights with or argue with anyone who doesn't agree with me. I just don't like when people ask for an explanation, but don't like the explanation. I shall make a public apology to Rowan, but I don't want her bothering me or Firefly. That's all I ask


I'm sorry Rowan

Thats fair enough. Although, Do you believe "because I just do" is an explanation? Because I know she believes, I dont need to be told 3 times that she believes, I just wanted to know why. She might have had a supernatural experience, she may have claimed to have spoke to god etc that is the information I was seeking. Its not that the explanation wasn't 'good enough'. In my eyes it wasnt an explanation at all.
Im happy to leave it at that as long as noone else unjustly critisizes me on this thread and puts words in my mouth.
Ive been conversing with HA and I've learned from him and conceded with some of his points, but he is a person of philisophical and intellectual wonder. Alpha is basically just a troll calling people names and agreeing with people. I would do well to ignore people like him, although admittadly, I find it difficult.

[Firefly]

The way I see it, anybody can believe what they want and not have a reason,sometimes what they believe might seem insane or just like a "what???" moment,but its what they believe in and I think everybody should respect that. Of course,some one is going to ask you why you believe what you do,but sometimes if theyr like me,they were brought up like that or its just..idk..something that they feel is real..but have no explanation to. ( did that make any sense? or I am just not making sense )

Oh, and I am not mad. I am not one for holding grudges or staying mad at someone for longer than a couple of minutes. :] Anyways,I think it is time WE ALL put this behind us,and move on.

*Oh...and can we please go back to the original thread topic puh-lease

[Rowan]

okay, ill get it going here. Im answering this topic under the assumption that an athiest can post when he thinks his beliefs are being mocked.


If I have (and i have had) mormans, christians or anyone of any faith come knocking on my door and try to convert me, I would tell them im not interested. If they continue to babble (which they tend to do, its their job to convert me) I will become highly offended because I assume they think im "uninformed" or "unintelligent" because I dont believe in god. Also I know for a fact they think im going to hell because the one unforgivable sin in christianity is not accepting jesus christ as your lord and savior. So that also pisses me off that they think im stupid and going to hell to suffer for all of eternity. I just hate the fact that its obvious they are using fear to control people. Whilst one is free to believe what they want, I dont believe its okay to FORCE it on your kids. Parents will push this on their kids from a young age (look above, its how she was brought up) and have no reason for believing what they do other than the family who didnt offer any other outlook on life. As an athiest myself, I dont need to preach athiesm, my kids will have the freedom of choice, as where a christian family (in most cases) would not. My evidence for this is that christian families more often than not, will go to church, attend mass, pray etc and athiests will not. Just because an athiest does nothing, it does mean they are preaching athiesm.

[Heartless Angel]

In a sense it kinda does. Whether we try to cram things down our kids throats or not, they will still learn from their parents. I actually was Christian as a kid, my main reasoning for this is that my parents were. And when I was a little kid, I like most kids, thought my parents knew everything. If my kids see me not going to church or praying before dinner, though I haven't told them anything, they will see that, and if they think I know everything, they'll draw the conclusion that these things aren't important, because the guy who knows everything doesn't care. Though not directly giving my beliefs to them, my beliefs will innevitably shape theirs. My parents are both Lutheran, as is most of my extended family, but they never really forced their beliefs on me. They took me to church as a kid and all, I'm sure they hoped I'd share their beliefs, as they saw it as their duty to raise me that way so I wouldn't burn in Hell for all eternity. Ultimately, it was left to me to make the choice. They shaped my beliefs, but my reason wouldn't let me accept them without question, and I kinda veered away from religion as I learned more things that made more sense to me. My parents were probably disappointed, and even saddened by my rejection of religion, but they accepted it.

[Sasquatch]

I wasn't aware that being an atheist was a "religion".

Most Athiests aren't.

Why are some religious folk so caught up in their own religion, that they cannot fathom the understanding that there's people who claim to not have one?

Why are some anti-religious folk so caught up in their own irrational hatred of religion that they cannot fathom the possibility that they have one themselves?

Atheism is the belief of the absence of a God in this world - that's it.

Not just God, but any supernatural power. And do you honestly believe that nothing has any powers at all, that we cannot see?

There is a big difference between "lack of belief" and "belief of lack". "Soft" Atheism -- that simply lacks a belief -- is no religion at all. "Hard" Atheism, on the other hand, is a belief concerning the existence (or non-existence) of supernatural powers. Which makes it as much of a religion as anything else. You don't have to worship to have religious beliefs, you don't have to have a strict afterlife belief -- you have faith in your side of a subject that is not and cannot ever be proven one way or another.

In a way, I think it sucks for you religious guys. At least I can sleep happy knowing exactly what's going to happen to me when I die, instead of fretting over existence in heaven or hell.

The religious people know where they're going, too. Which is one reason why they're religious. They actually have something to look forward to when they die.

Although, Do you believe "because I just do" is an explanation? Because I know she believes, I dont need to be told 3 times that she believes, I just wanted to know why. She might have had a supernatural experience, she may have claimed to have spoke to god etc that is the information I was seeking. Its not that the explanation wasn't 'good enough'. In my eyes it wasnt an explanation at all.

Because explaining reasons for holding personal religious beliefs to an anonymous teenager on an internet gaming forum is important to ... who? I'm sure we all have our reasons for believing what each of us believes, but nobody is obligated to explain them to you.

If they continue to babble (which they tend to do, its their job to convert me) I will become highly offended because I assume they think im "uninformed" or "unintelligent" because I dont believe in god.

The same way you think of people who do believe in God?

Also I know for a fact they think im going to hell because the one unforgivable sin in christianity is not accepting jesus christ as your lord and savior.

Wrong. Not accepting Jesus isn't a sin at all -- it's just lack of forgiveness. Where'd you get this "unforgiveable sin" crap?

So that also pisses me off that they think im stupid and going to hell to suffer for all of eternity.

Not stupid. Just wrong. I'm sure they don't think that they're more intelligent than anybody who doesn't believe the exact same things they do, they just think that they have been informed differently.

Just like you, undoubtedly, think intellectually less of people you consider "foolish" enough to believe in a religion.

The rest of your post is just mindless babbling about why you're angry that your mommy and daddy make you go to church instead of staying at home and playing video games, so I'll just ignore that.

[Rowan]

you are just a typical christian. There is absolutly nothing special about you. You're arguments are weak as well as your state of mind. Look at how you've attacked the athiests on this thread.

Not just God, but any supernatural power. And do you honestly believe that nothing has any powers at all, that we cannot see?

Yes, I honestly dont believe in your supernatural powers. Theres no viable evidence to sugguest there is so why should I default to believing something for no reason? if you are too arrogant and ignorant (refers to the special kind of people alpha mentioned) to understand that, I COMPLETELY understand.

The religious people know where they're going, too. Which is one reason why they're religious. They actually have something to look forward to when they die.

Actually, they dont know where they are going to, they are assuming based on their faith which is based on absoultly nothing other than a 'just because' belief.[/QUOTE]

Because explaining reasons for holding personal religious beliefs to an anonymous teenager on an internet gaming forum is important to ... who? I'm sure we all have our reasons for believing what each of us believes, but nobody is obligated to explain them to you.

Im sick of repeating myself. As a christian, the bible tells you to be always ready to explain the faith that you have. Therefor that was my argument into why she should tell me, she still retains the option to say no but my point still stands. Also, what the hell are you talking about? im asking her a question, why is that any of your damn buisiness to judge whether or not its important to me or not? I think you're forgetting even though its a 'gaming forum' the topic here is religion. So just pack up your things and take a hike, buddy. You're such a troll.

Wrong. Not accepting Jesus isn't a sin at all -- it's just lack of forgiveness. Where'd you get this "unforgiveable sin" crap?

Actually you can ask many different preachers and im sure they'll tell you that rejecting jesus christ will sign you up for a one way ticket to hell. It is a sin, im not sure what you're talking about. And when i said "unforgivable sin" i meant its something that you cannot get into heaven for. Please dont call my words crap, Buddy.

The rest of your post is just mindless babbling about why you're angry that your mommy and daddy make you go to church instead of staying at home and playing video games, so I'll just ignore that.

Just for your information, neither of my parents are religious and ive never attneded church. I chose to study religion off of my own free will and decided my own path once i had a better understanding of what else was out there.

[Selcopa]

I wasn't aware that being an atheist was a "religion". Why are some religious folk so caught up in their own religion, that they cannot fathom the understanding that there's people who claim to not have one? Atheism is the belief of the absence of a God in this world - that's it. We don't worship what we consider to be a fact. To quote a wise person: "Atheism is a religion in exactly the same way as not collecting stamps is a hobby."

There's no heaven and hell argument either. Death is what it is. Death. You're born, you live, and then you die. There's room for spirituality in atheism too, I guess, but nothing remotely similar to heaven or hell.

In a way, I think it sucks for you religious guys. At least I can sleep happy knowing exactly what's going to happen to me when I die, instead of fretting over existence in heaven or hell.



I think I demonstrated that already.

Of course us Christians get the loophole of being able to live a life as sinful and promiscuous as our fellow atheist, and still sneak in to heaven on the technicality, thereby enjoying life to its fullest and still getting to heaven free of atheists.

Atheism is most definitely a religion, it's certainly a centralized system of beliefs but with the added benefit of not having a book of hymns or a weekly attendance requirement check. But atheists still commit to a very structured set of beliefs and defend them to the death when they're challenged, just like any other religion.

Of course your spirituality idea is just to try to portray an idea of tolerance because you don't want to step on anyone's toes, if it's right for them then its okay right? Of course it makes sense that there are issues like that in the religion of atheists, as Theists still have these issues and we get together to discuss them weekly, whereas atheists only have their meetings semi annually.

Atheists have their own set of beliefs that are a stretch to believe, just because they're science's best guess doesn't mean they're right. Such as the concept of tiny particle's gravitational pull slowly coming together to such an overwhelming force that hydrogen fusion begins and creates an energy creation process all on accident that is so efficient that not even humans with the sole intention of creating energy can come near to replicating. Sure it's science's best guess and can be pretty close on but there's no real way to test all this at the end of the day, other than looking at different stars in different phases and guessing that this is what happens most likely.

[OnOneRyder]

Atheism is most definitely a religion, it's certainly a centralized system of beliefs but with the added benefit of not having a book of hymns or a weekly attendance requirement check. But atheists still commit to a very structured set of beliefs and defend them to the death when they're challenged, just like any other religion.

A religion is a system of beliefs shared by a group strengthened in faith, two big things in that definition are system and faith. A system of beliefs in religion denotes ideas specific to a particular religion which would not apply another. My atheism could be for a very different reason than someone else's, we are not sharing the same beliefs. One may choose to believe they "know" there is no god, others such as myself choose to believe its existence is illogical and therefore unlikely, different belief systems. Faith is the blind belief of something, or claiming knowledge when that knowledge is in actuality unknowable. Faith is not required for atheism as by definition it is the rejection of a belief, plain and simple. Do you require faith to reject my proposal that the chapstick to my left is the creator of the universe, or are you able to conclude through reason that the unlikelyness of that situation is so absurd that it need not be considered a possibility? Because by your reasoning there IS faith required to say it is not the creator, and that your beliefs would be a religion.

[Heartless Angel]

Athiesm is not a religion.

"Religion- A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially 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."

To simply say there is no God does not come with a substitute belief about what did create the universe. Many athiests happens to share one, but athiesm as a concept does not have anything to do with it. It does not have a set of beliefs about what the nature of the universe is, simply rejection of one idea. Athiesm does not indicate purpose of any kind. Athiesm does not involve any devotional or ritual observances, a moral code, or anything else that defines something as a religion.

To call athiesm a religion is generally a sad attempt at a straw man fallacy, to give the religious some claim that was never made to attempt to refute (such as holes in the theory of evolution or the big bang theory), usually as a diversion to shift the burden of proof away from themselves. Athiesm is a religion in the same sense that not colelcting stamps is a hobby, not smoking is a habbit, transparent is a color, and bald is a hair style.

I actually find it really funny that christians attack athiests for not having a perfect understanding of their faith before attacking it, meanwhile you've decided what all athiests believe without knowing a damn thing about them. To be athiest does not imply acceptance of the big bang theory, evolution or darwinism, or anything else. Simply the rejection of the divine. That is the only belief all ahtiests must share to be athiests, and that doesn't fit any one of the parts of the definition of religion.

[Selcopa]

A religion is a system of beliefs shared by a group strengthened in faith, two big things in that definition are system and faith. A system of beliefs in religion denotes ideas specific to a particular religion which would not apply another. My atheism could be for a very different reason than someone else's, we are not sharing the same beliefs.One may choose to believe they "know" there is no god, others such as myself choose to believe its existence is illogical and therefore unlikely, different belief systems. Faith is the blind belief of something, or claiming knowledge when that knowledge is in actuality unknowable. Faith is not required for atheism as by definition it is the rejection of a belief, plain and simple. Do you require faith to reject my proposal that the chapstick to my left is the creator of the universe, or are you able to conclude through reason that the unlikelyness of that situation is so absurd that it need not be considered a possibility? Because by your reasoning there IS faith required to say it is not the creator, and that your beliefs would be a religion.

Essentially your 'nothing' isn't necessarily the same as somebody else's 'nothing'.

Obviously that doesn't work because then there would be something, as your nothing would need a trait to make it unique to someone else's nothing, which means creating god

Atheism must be under the same system because you cannot have different nothing's. You might have semantic squabbles amongst yourself like Baptists and Christian reformed have, but they're all still protestant christians. Similarly you might have different types of atheists, but they all fall under the same belief that there is no god.

And yes it is a belief, saying you don't see evidence for god so there is no god is still a belief and is contingent on the fact that god has not shown himself to you in a manner of your preference, which most likely is an old man with a beard, book and staff.

Comparing the existence of god to chapstick being the creator is borderline derogatory, I understand it is an example you are trying to make but it's still a bad one. And there are many mysteries that science cannot explain which makes comparing existence of god to chapstick simply ridiculous and silly.

example: when they calculated the force and the momentum of particles during the big bang, they noticed the particles moved faster than they should have according to the math. The solution? They added an inflation period to the big bang, where they allowed particles to move faster, in order to make the math fit. Tons of people blindly accept this as the facts, but this is just an accounting gimmick to make sure the numbers line up. Does this prove god? No, but it does put uncertainty into the certain science. And its probable that not all things can be explained with mere chance and luck resulting in efficiency that intelligent design(man or god) cannot recreate.

[Sasquatch]

you are just a typical christian. There is absolutly nothing special about you. You're arguments are weak as well as your state of mind. Look at how you've attacked the athiests on this thread.

When did I say anything about my own faith, claim to be special, or "attack" Atheists, praytell?

Actually, they dont know where they are going to, they are assuming based on their faith which is based on absoultly nothing other than a 'just because' belief.

You could be referring to anybody, here. My point was that people of any religion, including hard Atheism, "know" where they're going when they die as much as everybody else does. Nobody knows. Instead, we have faith. But Christians don't "fret" over whether they're going to one place or the other, they "know" where they're going, just like you "know" that you'll simply cease to exist.

Im sick of repeating myself. As a christian, the bible tells you to be always ready to explain the faith that you have.

That's much more accurate than the pathetic attempt of a scripture quote that you had earlier. No matter -- where does the Bible command Christians to explain their faith to you? If you don't like somebody's explanation of their faith, the burden isn't on them to deal with you badgering them.

Also, what the hell are you talking about? im asking her a question, why is that any of your damn buisiness to judge whether or not its important to me or not?

I'm not sure where you got the impression that I judged, thought, or gave a damn whether or not anything is important to you. Of course, it could be assumed that it's important to you, since you badger them about telling you while at the same time insulting their faith.

Actually you can ask many different preachers and im sure they'll tell you that rejecting jesus christ will sign you up for a one way ticket to hell. It is a sin, im not sure what you're talking about. And when i said "unforgivable sin" i meant its something that you cannot get into heaven for. Please dont call my words crap, Buddy.

I don't know how many preachers you've "asked", but my guess would be zero, since your words are crap. Refusing Jesus is not a sin. Rejecting Jesus will not "sign you up for a one way ticket to hell [sic]" -- we're already signed up. Accepting Jesus doesn't mean you don't get signed up, it means you get taken off the list. A simple understanding of Christianity or the Bible would correct this for you.

It's too bad you're offended, but I call a spade a spade. And I call crap, crap.

A religion is a system of beliefs shared by a group strengthened in faith, two big things in that definition are system and faith.

"System" or "set"? Are you trying to claim that you have absolutely no faith in anything, or that you have absolutely no belief system, even specific to yourself?

Wouldn't it mean that there are absolutely no religions in the world, since every one of us interprets our religion -- or claimed lack thereof -- in a different way?

Faith is the blind belief of something, or claiming knowledge when that knowledge is in actuality unknowable.

Faith is not a blind belief. I have faith that my truck will be where I left it when I get back to it, I have faith that my keys will fit the same padlocks that they fit last time I tried them, I have faith that the food I just ate for lunch isn't actually seasoned, disguised alien eggs that will hatch in my intestines and eat me from the inside.

Faith is not required for atheism as by definition it is the rejection of a belief, plain and simple.

Soft Atheism is the rejection of a belief. Hard Atheism is a belief in rejection. Hard Atheism, as a result, is faith -- not just faith, but blind faith.

I don't know what color hair you have. But I could say that I don't believe you have brown hair. That would be equivalent to soft Atheism -- I don't have a belief on your hair color, so I have no faith that it is or isn't any particular color. Or, I could say: I believe that your hair is not brown. That would be a hard belief, equivalent to hard Atheism -- I have a belief that it is not brown. And since I have no evidence either way, that belief is based on faith.

Do you require faith to reject my proposal that the chapstick to my left is the creator of the universe, or are you able to conclude through reason that the unlikelyness of that situation is so absurd that it need not be considered a possibility? Because by your reasoning there IS faith required to say it is not the creator, and that your beliefs would be a religion.

Yes. It does require faith to say that your chapstick is not the creator of the universe. Since there is no way to know for certain, even though it is incredibly unlikely, it still requires faith to believe.

And if you want to call it a religion, sure -- it could be combined with most other religions that say "such-and-such is the creator of the universe, which means that anything that doesn't fit into the such-and-such category is not possible to be the creator of the universe." Just like you believe, "such-and-such is not the creator of the universe, which means that anything that doesn't fit into the such-and-such category is possible to be the creator of the universe."

I actually find it really funny that christians attack athiests for not having a perfect understanding of their faith before attacking it, meanwhile you've decided what all athiests believe without knowing a damn thing about them.

Who said where anything about what all Atheists believe? And where have Atheists been attacked in this thread?

To be athiest does not imply acceptance of the big bang theory, evolution or darwinism, or anything else. Simply the rejection of the divine.

You might want to narrow that down a bit more, since the Big Bang and Evolutionism both require a faith in supernatural power.

By the way, kids. It's Atheism. The e comes first, then the i.

[Unknown Entity]

Not just God, but any supernatural power. And do you honestly believe that nothing has any powers at all, that we cannot see?

Atheism is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, or Gods or Divine Power, for the slower people. That doesn't mean we cannot believe in the supernatural or have a sense of spirituality.

Atheism is most definitely a religion, it's certainly a centralized system of beliefs but with the added benefit of not having a book of hymns or a weekly attendance requirement check. But atheists still commit to a very structured set of beliefs and defend them to the death when they're challenged, just like any other religion.

Everyone does that anyway, because they believe they're right, and everyone else is wrong. Come on, man, you've read this thread (and a few other threads around this forum) and you still can't pick that up?

Of course your spirituality idea is just to try to portray an idea of tolerance because you don't want to step on anyone's toes, if it's right for them then its okay right?

It's not about stepping on toes. It's what I believe. If someone believes differently, then all the more for them. I don't have time or energy to waste trying to convert someone away from what makes them happy, and helps them sleep at night.

Of course it makes sense that there are issues like that in the religion of atheists, as Theists still have these issues and we get together to discuss them weekly, whereas atheists only have their meetings semi annually.

What can I say? We're just not that needy.

[Alpha]

This is something I've thought about a bit.

In theory, atheism is not believing in anything.

In reality, it usually manifests as the belief in nothing.

It's that distinction which puts me with Sasquatch in this one. Atheism is a religion (and I even noticed him spelling it with a capital). Sure, there is no collective moral code, no obligations on members, no central institution/s. But religions don't always have those either. Christianity can be interpreted in countless ways. Millennialist, literalist, and fundamentalist, to name three. People who both claim to be Christian can and do have very different takes on their own faith, the status of others in relation to this faith, how and in what areas it hasa bearing on their secular existence... and so on and so forth. To claim that atheism isn't a religion due to an absence of such rules is erroneous, because the same logic would require you to remove the label of religion from Christianity (as an example).

[Rowan]

‪Matt Dillahunty - Greatest Rant Ever&#x202crlm; - YouTube







I rest my case. If anyone thinks what he says is wrong, they are delusional.

[Heartless Angel]

Who said where anything about what all Atheists believe? And where have Atheists been attacked in this thread?

In this thread, nowhere really. That was more a a generalization.

You might want to narrow that down a bit more, since the Big Bang and Evolutionism both require a faith in supernatural power.

The fundamental forces of the universe aren't really supernatural. It requires faith that they fill in the blanks we can't, but no supernatural power is required. And athiesm, as I said, does not demand belief in any of this.

By the way, kids. It's Atheism. The e comes first, then the i.

Comon now, I know you're too smart to resort to attacking spelling.

[OnOneRyder]

Essentially your 'nothing' isn't necessarily the same as somebody else's 'nothing'.

Obviously that doesn't work because then there would be something, as your nothing would need a trait to make it unique to someone else's nothing, which means creating god

We differ in our opinions of claims which have been made, not in the claims which we make because atheism makes no claim of knowledge.

"System" or "set"? Are you trying to claim that you have absolutely no faith in anything, or that you have absolutely no belief system, even specific to yourself?

Wouldn't it mean that there are absolutely no religions in the world, since every one of us interprets our religion -- or claimed lack thereof -- in a different way?

No, because each individual of a particular religion believes in a deity who possesses certain traits and claims to have specific knowledge of that god. Atheism makes no such claims.

Faith is not a blind belief. I have faith that my truck will be where I left it when I get back to it, I have faith that my keys will fit the same padlocks that they fit last time I tried them, I have faith that the food I just ate for lunch isn't actually seasoned, disguised alien eggs that will hatch in my intestines and eat me from the inside.

You have prior experiences which tell you that it is very likely that your truck and keys will act in the same manor in which you left them, as they have time and time again. The evidence of past experience tells you that you don't have to worry, evidence is absent in faith.

Soft Atheism is the rejection of a belief. Hard Atheism is a belief in rejection. Hard Atheism, as a result, is faith -- not just faith, but blind faith.

True, making a claim of knowledge either way requires faith.

You might want to narrow that down a bit more, since the Big Bang and Evolutionism both require a faith in supernatural power.

I like how only one line apart you create your own word, and then address someone's spelling. There is no such thing as evolutionism so lets get that straight right now. Also, explain how evolution requires faith. Keep in mind you'll need to be quite knowledgeable here to sway a position as evolution is a testable theory which has shown itself time and time again to be fact. Evolution works, plain and simple.

I rest my case. If anyone thinks what he says is wrong, they are delusional.

While I don't disagree with the arguments he makes, they don't help you at all. You can't just link to a video of someone else's arguments to fortify your own. Makes you look foolish and arrogant, especially when you follow it up with "he's right so you're wrong".

[Rowan]

While I don't disagree with the arguments he makes, they don't help you at all. You can't just link to a video of someone else's arguments to fortify your own. Makes you look foolish and arrogant, especially when you follow it up with "he's right so you're wrong".

Well im sure theres nothing wrong with referencing people, in fact, I believe it to be something many people do in various debates and arguements. I thought the argument had relevance to this topic, although I guess I was wrong, if you say so. I think I've made it clear that I dont care if people think im arrogant, Ill continue to push and prod them until they give me the answers and information I want from them.

Edit:
Also in response to Sasquatch, It seems to me like he believes that there is no hell and everyone goes to Heaven when they die reguardless of the way they live their life. That is an extraordinary claim to make as a christian, and ill tell you why. If that were the case, then you can forget about going to church, praying for forgivness, you can also forget about absoultly everything the bible teaches you because by Sasquatches logic, Im already forgiven and do not need to live a life of religious worship to get into heaven. Or maybe I misunderstand you Sasquatch?

I like how only one line apart you create your own word, and then address someone's spelling. There is no such thing as evolutionism so lets get that straight right now. Also, explain how evolution requires faith. Keep in mind you'll need to be quite knowledgeable here to sway a position as evolution is a testable theory which has shown itself time and time again to be fact. Evolution works, plain and simple.

Evolution doesnt have substantial evidence to prove it exists. If you have proof that evolution works, Id very much like to see a reference.

[OnOneRyder]

Evolution doesnt have substantial evidence to prove it exists. If you have proof that evolution works, Id very much like to see a reference.

Actually, it most certainly does. Not only is it considered the strongest theory out there, but it is considered fact by the major players in modern biology. To make the claim as a layman that the evidence is not in place is an extremely bold one and I challenge you to make a case for your claim through PM's so as to not unecessarily derail this thread. The case for evolution being fact is monumental in both peer reviewed studies and practical application aiding to the benefit of mankind. Both micro and macro evolution are a reality.

Well im sure theres nothing wrong with referencing people, in fact, I believe it to be something many people do in various debates and arguements. I thought the argument had relevance to this topic, although I guess I was wrong, if you say so. I think I've made it clear that I dont care if people think im arrogant, Ill continue to push and prod them until they give me the answers and information I want from them.

It was an argument for morality and justice, which have not been discussed here and you brought it forward as though it crushed the arguments which actually were taking place. It was very eloquently presented and Matt is a very intelligent man when it comes to religion but in this instance, it was irrelevant to the topic.

[Sasquatch]

In this thread, nowhere really. That was more a a generalization.

So you made two statements, not differentiating between the two of them, then claimed that at least one of those statements doesn't apply to this thread. Try to keep focus, here.

The fundamental forces of the universe aren't really supernatural. It requires faith that they fill in the blanks we can't, but no supernatural power is required. And athiesm, as I said, does not demand belief in any of this.

The actual, proven forces of nature are not supernatural at all. Every theory on the creation or nature of the universe, on the other hand, requires faith in some type of supernatural power -- not supernatural diety, but supernatural power. Even if your faith is that these supernatural happenings had natural causes, your faith is still in the supernatural actions.

Comon now, I know you're too smart to resort to attacking spelling.

And I know that you're smart enough to be able to spell a simple word like "Atheist" correctly. Right?

We differ in our opinions of claims which have been made, not in the claims which we make because atheism makes no claim of knowledge.

Wrong. Hard Atheism does make a claim of knowledge -- in the non-existence of a diety. Just like I can claim to "know" that you don't have brown hair. Soft Atheism, on the other hand, makes no claim of knowledge. Don't confuse the two.

No, because each individual of a particular religion believes in a deity who possesses certain traits and claims to have specific knowledge of that god. Atheism makes no such claims.

No, hard Atheism claims in a lack of any diety. Soft Atheism makes no such claims.

You have prior experiences which tell you that it is very likely that your truck and keys will act in the same manor in which you left them, as they have time and time again. The evidence of past experience tells you that you don't have to worry, evidence is absent in faith.

Wrong. Faith is a belief in something without proof. Unless you consider "evidence" and "proof" to be synanymous, evidence is not absent in faith. People have personal evidence for anything and everything they believe -- the *manner* in which my truck and keys have acted in the past is evidence that they will continue to act in the same manner, but not at all is it proof. Hence, everybody has faith in many, many things.

I like how only one line apart you create your own word, and then address someone's spelling. There is no such thing as evolutionism so lets get that straight right now.

Wrong. Evolutionism is the belief in macro-evolution. This is not a word I "created" -- try doing a little research.

Also, explain how evolution requires faith.

Because it's not proven, it requires faith to believe. This is a simple concept, I'm not quite sure how you are unable to grasp it.

Keep in mind you'll need to be quite knowledgeable here to sway a position as evolution is a testable theory which has shown itself time and time again to be fact. Evolution works, plain and simple.

Micro-evolution, while not testable in any way, has been observed and proven. Macri-evolution, aka speciesm, aka Evolutionism, is not testable, nor has it been proven.

Also in response to Sasquatch, It seems to me like he believes that there is no hell and everyone goes to Heaven when they die reguardless of the way they live their life.

If you somehow got that impression, I'm sure that it was pulled not from my post, but from your own ass.

That is an extraordinary claim to make as a christian ...

Where in this thread have I discussed my personal faith?

Evolution doesnt have substantial evidence to prove it exists. If you have proof that evolution works, Id very much like to see a reference.

Wow. Something you've been correct on.

Not only is it considered the strongest theory out there ...

So ... it's the most probable of things that haven't been proven. Got it.

... but it is considered fact by the major players in modern biology.

Except that it's not a Law, because it doesn't fit any of the requirements for becoming a Law, which is the only way for any scientific theory to be considered "fact". The primary requirement being testability.

The case for evolution being fact is monumental in both peer reviewed studies and practical application aiding to the benefit of mankind.

The case for Evolutionism being "fact" is monumental in those who choose to place supernatural powers on "nature" instead of a supernatural diety. It would be like saying "McDonald's has the world's best hamburgers, except for Hardee's, but Hardee's doesn't count because it's not McDonald's."

Both micro and macro evolution are a reality.

If you believe so -- if you have that faith -- maybe you should try to find some proof. Because none has been found yet.

[OnOneRyder]

Like I told Rowan, I guess the majority of the academic institutions on Earth who specialize in further the study of topics such as biology are incorrect, have been for decades and layman's on video game forums are privy to information which they are not. Evolution is testable, it has passed countless peer revisions and it is accepted by the majority of academia. Anyone who claims otherwise while holding no actual qualifications themselves is making the claim out of ignorance.

Wrong. Hard Atheism does make a claim of knowledge -- in the non-existence of a diety. Just like I can claim to "know" that you don't have brown hair. Soft Atheism, on the other hand, makes no claim of knowledge. Don't confuse the two.

Then it is not atheism, atheism by definition makes no claim.

[Alpha]

Then it is not atheism, atheism by definition makes no claim.

Honest question: what does one say to a self-professed atheist who tells me there is no God?

Disclaimer: I don't believe in God. Probably. Generally I just see myself as confused and as agnostic, on balance. But I don't much care for anybody who makes a claim at absolute knowledge when no one is privy to that.

Another honest question: I accept evolution as a theory. But I don't accept 'the majority of academics accept it' as a valid reason for accepting it as a theory. A majority of those learned at one stage in history believed that the Sun orbited the Earth. They were wrong, but your logic would suggest we should never have bothered challenging them.

I think I just don't like when people make absolute claims on the basis of uncertainty. Evolution is a theory. Albeit, a theory I accept. But a theory nonetheless, and it is not helpful to gloss over that. Better to accept its limitations, in order to encourage honest enquiry to either make the theory more sound and closer to a law, or to replace it with a different theory, if its limitations are in fact found to be gaping holes. I prefer that people are honest above all else.

Of course, creationism is also deserved of the same attention. I think that it is far less conceptually sound, but not worthwhile dismissing out of hand. Doing so is counter-intellectual.