MrSoulpower said:

Huggiebear said:

6. Atheism Incredibly some atheists are far too vocal with their opposition to God (I am probably guilty a bit here). As much as religions may be wrong to them, religion is still a choice that people should be entitled too

My guess the best theological path = AGNOSTICISM (Believing in God or a higher being, but not following organised religious dogma)

Atheism isn't a religion, so why do you list it under such?

Agnosticism isn't a religion either. Agostics simply have a higher tolerance levels than atheists. Most agnostics (like myself) do not believe in God, but unlike atheists, who claim to know that there isn't a God, agnostics say that we can't know for sure either way. But there are some agnostic deists, even if this group is relatively small.

Definition of agnosticism according to wikipedia:

Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable

I also consider myself an agnostic. Through the years as I get older I see where I have held on to an idea or belief only to later see things through other points of view or more honestly facts to the contrary.

Anyway, I walked outside the house one day thinking my blouse was tan. Someone told me definitively and emphatically that it was taupe. Someone else guaranteed me that it was a beige more than anything. To this day I am not sure what color it really is. I have become agnostic about almost everything.

I would rather everyone be more tolerant. Why hate religion and faith so much?

MrSoulpower said:

RodeoSchro said:

i don't think there's any difference at all, because I do not believe for one second that Jesus Christ would want anyone killed in his name.

Agreed, but many religious organizations did kill in his name.

Shucks, Charles Manson killed in the Beatles' name, but that doesn't mean they condoned or encouraged what he did.

cborgman said:

in fact, i recall jesus saying what you do unto the least of my brothers you do unto me

...which is why most bible-beaters are FAR removed from the teachings of Christ.

RodeoSchro said:

MrSoulpower said:

Agreed, but many religious organizations did kill in his name.

Shucks, Charles Manson killed in the Beatles' name, but that doesn't mean they condoned or encouraged what he did.

Then why didn't Jesus come back down to stop the madness comitted in his name?

That was not a serious question, of course. As an agnostic, I believe that Jesus wasn't a supernatural being and that he is dead and will not return.

I think you're quite stretching it here. Manson was one person, he had no association with the Beatles other than that he bought their records.

The Catholic Church, however, is the Jesus club. It's the oldest, biggest and most powerful Christian church in the history of Christianity. To one billion believers, the Pope is the representative of Christ on Earth. Now if this organization commits murder, torture and oppression in the name of God, it has a little bit more weight than Charlie Mansion and his love for the Beatles, don't you think?

Personally, I don't think Jesus - if he exists in the form that you believe in - would support these killings. But my issue is not with Jesus. I don't even believe in him. My issue is the atrocities committed by organized religion in the name of God.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I would rather everyone be more tolerant. Why hate religion and faith so much?

It's a part of being human. You fear/loathe/hate that which you do not understand.

The way Christians were persecuted in Roman times was mirrored in the way non-Christians were persecuted in Roman Catholic times, and could be mirrored a century from now if religion as a whole is persecuted in the forthcoming "scientific times" (I made that up of course).

The closest we've been to Utopia was when we were still swinging from trees scavenging for food butt-ass naked. The moment we picked up that bone/stick/rock and learned to use it to enforce our rules...it all went to hell.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I would rather everyone be more tolerant. Why hate religion and faith so much?

That's a rather one-sided view, isn't it? Did you ever ask believers why they hate non-believers so much? The Crusades? Inquisition? Suicide-bombers? 9/11? Hate against gays? And your issue is with "hate and intolerance" from atheists? Really?

Where is the hate and intolerance that you speak of? Since when do atheists kill believers for believing? Especially atheists and agnostics on this thread are not hateful and intolerant. Maybe we just don't want religious beliefs being forced on us. And what about the gay forum members who feel discriminated against by religiously motivated oppression? Where is your sympathy for that?

Most atheists are more tolerant and less hateful than you'd be willing to admit. Nodody is advocating outlawing religion here.

[Edited 12/13/10 9:43am]

MrSoulpower said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I would rather everyone be more tolerant. Why hate religion and faith so much?

That's a rather one-sided view, isn't it? Did you ever ask believers why they hate non-believers so much? The Crusades? Inquisition? Suicide-bombers? 9/11? And your issue is with "hate and intolerance" from atheists? Really?

I sure as heck DO. Are you suggesting I am OKAY with side events? I dang sure am not. If people were more tolerant (if Christians read their bible they would know that it commands us to NOT judge others that do not believe. And it also commands us to be tolerant of other faiths.)

Where is the hate and intolerance that you speak of? Since when do atheists kill believers for believing? Especially atheists and agnostics on this thread are not hateful and intolerant. Maybe we just don't want religious beliefs being forced on us. And what about the gay forum members who feel discriminated against by religiously motivated oppression? Where is your sympathy for that?

Someone said the world would be better off with out religion and do not forget the 'does faith deserve respect' topic. My view is tolerant, that is be more tolerant. yet some rather point out all that is bad in a group than all that is good.

Most atheists are more tolerant and less hateful than you'd be willing to admit. Nodody is advocating outlawing religion here.

When did i suggest the 'be more tolerant' was limited to any one group? It applied to all people.

MrSoulpower said:

RodeoSchro said:

Shucks, Charles Manson killed in the Beatles' name, but that doesn't mean they condoned or encouraged what he did.

Then why didn't Jesus come back down to stop the madness comitted in his name?

That was not a serious question, of course. As an agnostic, I believe that Jesus wasn't a supernatural being and that he is dead and will not return.

I think you're quite stretching it here. Manson was one person, he had no association with the Beatles other than that he bought their records.

The Catholic Church, however, is the Jesus club. It's the oldest, biggest and most powerful Christian church in the history of Christianity. To one billion believers, the Pope is the representative of Christ on Earth. Now if this organization commits murder, torture and oppression in the name of God, it has a little bit more weight than Charlie Mansion and his love for the Beatles, don't you think?

Personally, I don't think Jesus - if he exists in the form that you believe in - would support these killings. But my issue is not with Jesus. I don't even believe in him. My issue is the atrocities committed by organized religion in the name of God.

But my issue is not with Jesus. I don't even believe in him.

Why not?

Personally, I don't think Jesus - if he exists in the form that you believe in - would support these killings.

But you don't believe in him...

So how could you make that assumption?

Are we playing the "IF" game now?

Convenient. LOL!

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I sure as heck DO. Are you suggesting I am OKAY with side events? I dang sure am not. If people were more tolerant (if Christians read their bible they would know that it commands us to NOT judge others that do not believe. And it also commands us to be tolerant of other faiths.)

I'm not suggesting anything. But all I saw was that you complained about hatred towards religion and faith.

Someone said the world would be better off with out religion and do not forget the 'does faith deserve respect' topic.

Someone also said that without religion, there would be no morality, no happiness and criminality would reign. Did you address this at all?

My view is tolerant, that is be more tolerant. yet some rather point out all that is bad in a group than all that is good.

True, that's a generalization. But most here also pointed out that both good and evil exist outside of religion. And by asking "why hate religion and faith so much," you are making a very general statement as well.

When did i suggest the 'be more tolerant' was limited to any one group? It applied to all people.

You certainly did not make that clear, as all you referred to in that post were people who "hate religion and faith so much."

NevermindAlexzander said:

MrSoulpower said:

Why not?

Personally, I don't think Jesus - if he exists in the form that you believe in - would support these killings.

But you don't believe in him...

So how could you make that assumption?

Are we playing the "IF" game now?

Convenient. LOL!

I've also played the IF game with you, when you asked hypothetical questions.

when people say they do not believe in Jesus they mean as in the Son of God. They are not arguing that there was not such a person, just that he was just a person. To some even if there was such a person it is not important as he was just a man and nothing supernatural.

MrSoulpower said:

RodeoSchro said:

Shucks, Charles Manson killed in the Beatles' name, but that doesn't mean they condoned or encouraged what he did.

Then why didn't Jesus come back down to stop the madness comitted in his name?

That was not a serious question, of course. As an agnostic, I believe that Jesus wasn't a supernatural being and that he is dead and will not return.

I think you're quite stretching it here. Manson was one person, he had no association with the Beatles other than that he bought their records.

The Catholic Church, however, is the Jesus club. It's the oldest, biggest and most powerful Christian church in the history of Christianity. To one billion believers, the Pope is the representative of Christ on Earth. Now if this organization commits murder, torture and oppression in the name of God, it has a little bit more weight than Charlie Mansion and his love for the Beatles, don't you think?

Personally, I don't think Jesus - if he exists in the form that you believe in - would support these killings. But my issue is not with Jesus. I don't even believe in him. My issue is the atrocities committed by organized religion in the name of God.

Whether it's one man or one billion, the fact remains that nowhere has Jesus Christ ever asked or condoned killling done in his name.

God gave humans free will. What we do with it, and the consequences thereof, are our problem.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

when people say they do not believe in Jesus they mean as in the Son of God. They are not arguing that there was not such a person, just that he was just a person. To some even if there was such a person it is not important as he was just a man and nothing supernatural.

Exactly. Did Jesus exist? It's possible, even though he might be a combination of different people. But do I believe that he is the son of God, that he walked over water, turned water into wine, healed fatally sick people and resurrected after being killed to hang out among his peers for a few more days before eventually elevating to heaven? No.

There's very little historical contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus - in spite of the fact that Romans were very good at documenting current events .. they had a very modern approach to journalism. Pliny the younger briefly mentioned Christ's name about 80 years after the alleged crucification. He discussed Christians, who worshipped a man with the name Christus. Tacitus mentioned Jesus almost 90 years after his death, reported that Jesus was executed by Pilatus, but he doesn't cite his sources, so it is also possible that he was already referring to a myth circulating among early Christians. Suetonius wrote about a man called Chrestus.

Of course there are also some Jewish reports .. Flavius Josephus may have been among the first to write about Jesus about 70 years after his death. There are also some references in the Talmud, but they were dated to a later time.

Bottom line, there were decades between the time of Jesus' alleged death and the first independent reports of his deeds. In decades, myth has free-reign and there is no way to verify what really happened, who Jesus really was and if he actually existed. It's all a matter of ... faith.

RodeoSchro said:

MrSoulpower said:

Then why didn't Jesus come back down to stop the madness comitted in his name?

That was not a serious question, of course. As an agnostic, I believe that Jesus wasn't a supernatural being and that he is dead and will not return.

I think you're quite stretching it here. Manson was one person, he had no association with the Beatles other than that he bought their records.

The Catholic Church, however, is the Jesus club. It's the oldest, biggest and most powerful Christian church in the history of Christianity. To one billion believers, the Pope is the representative of Christ on Earth. Now if this organization commits murder, torture and oppression in the name of God, it has a little bit more weight than Charlie Mansion and his love for the Beatles, don't you think?

Personally, I don't think Jesus - if he exists in the form that you believe in - would support these killings. But my issue is not with Jesus. I don't even believe in him. My issue is the atrocities committed by organized religion in the name of God.

Whether it's one man or one billion, the fact remains that nowhere has Jesus Christ ever asked or condoned killling done in his name.

God gave humans free will. What we do with it, and the consequences thereof, are our problem.

If you follow this discussion closely, the issue that most atheist/agnostics have is with organized religion and it's violent and oppressive history, not the alleged thoughts or deeds of Jesus Christ.

MrSoulpower said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

when people say they do not believe in Jesus they mean as in the Son of God. They are not arguing that there was not such a person, just that he was just a person. To some even if there was such a person it is not important as he was just a man and nothing supernatural.

Exactly. Did Jesus exist? It's possible, even though he might be a combination of different people. But do I believe that he is the son of God, that he walked over water, turned water into wine, healed fatally sick people and resurrected after being killed to hang out among his peers for a few more days before eventually elevating to heaven? No.

There's very little historical contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus - in spite of the fact that Romans were very good at documenting current events .. they had a very modern approach to journalism. Pliny the younger briefly mentioned Christ's name about 80 years after the alleged crucification. He discussed Christians, who worshipped a man with the name Christus. Tacitus mentioned Jesus almost 90 years after his death, reported that Jesus was executed by Pilatus, but he doesn't cite his sources, so it is also possible that he was already referring to a myth circulating among early Christians. Suetonius wrote about a man called Chrestus.

Of course there are also some Jewish reports .. Flavius Josephus may have been among the first to write about Jesus about 70 years after his death. There are also some references in the Talmud, but they were dated to a later time.

Bottom line, there were decades between the time of Jesus' alleged death and the first independent reports of his deeds. In decades, myth has free-reign and there is no way to verify what really happened, who Jesus really was and if he actually existed. It's all a matter of ... faith.

it is a bit like santa. I have been told he is based on a real person that made toys for a few kids... and I am like 'yeah and how is that even close to the myth?'

i could dress up like a rodent and run around the city at night looking to fight crime but that will not make me batman!

MrSoulpower said:

Nobody is advocating outlawing religion here.

...well, not out loud at least...

PurpleJedi said:

MrSoulpower said:

Nobody is advocating outlawing religion here.

...well, not out loud at least...

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I would rather everyone be more tolerant. Why hate religion and faith so much?

I wanted to add something here, because I have a hard time understanding what "hate" you are talking about.

For example, check out this thread which is currently in the top ten in this forum:

http://prince.org/msg/105/347320

The entire thread is a list of Bible quotes, meant to inspire every day. Did you see just one atheist posting on this thread, disapproving of the quotes or displaying hate towards believers? No. Because really, we don't care what believers do - as long as they don't try to force their beliefs on us. If there was so much hatred here for faith and religion, then why did nobody jack that thread?

Why are not more atheists burning churches in this country to show their hate for religion?

Why don't we see religious leaders being murdered by atheists? If a religious leader is being murdered, it is usually done by someone of a different faith - for a religious reason.

Why has the absolutely insane Creationist Museum in Kentucky not been burnt to the ground by hateful atheists?

Why are no believers being attacked or ridiculed by hateful atheists on their way to church?

I really don't understand where you get this idea from that atheists hate religion and faith. I certainly don't hate it. I don't understand how a rational, intelligent person can subscribe to this concept - but if it makes them happy and helps them to become a better person, then fine.

MrSoulpower said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I would rather everyone be more tolerant. Why hate religion and faith so much?

I wanted to add something here, because I have a hard time understanding what "hate" you are talking about.

For example, check out this thread which is currently in the top ten in this forum:

http://prince.org/msg/105/347320

The entire thread is a list of Bible quotes, meant to inspire every day. Did you see just one atheist posting on this thread, disapproving of the quotes or displaying hate towards believers? No. Because really, we don't care what believers do - as long as they don't try to force their beliefs on us. If there was so much hatred here for faith and religion, then why did nobody jack that thread?

Why are not more atheists burning churches in this country to show their hate for religion?

Why don't we see religious leaders being murdered by atheists? If a religious leader is being murdered, it is usually done by someone of a different faith - for a religious reason.

Why has the absolutely insane Creationist Museum in Kentucky not been burnt to the ground by hateful atheists?

Why are no believers being attacked or ridiculed by hateful atheists on their way to church?

I really don't understand where you get this idea from that atheists hate religion and faith. I certainly don't hate it. I don't understand how a rational, intelligent person can subscribe to this concept - but if it makes them happy and helps them to become a better person, then fine.

hate is hate, and I agree that there are many that use religion as an excuse to be hateful. Sad but true.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

MrSoulpower said:

I wanted to add something here, because I have a hard time understanding what "hate" you are talking about.

For example, check out this thread which is currently in the top ten in this forum:

http://prince.org/msg/105/347320

The entire thread is a list of Bible quotes, meant to inspire every day. Did you see just one atheist posting on this thread, disapproving of the quotes or displaying hate towards believers? No. Because really, we don't care what believers do - as long as they don't try to force their beliefs on us. If there was so much hatred here for faith and religion, then why did nobody jack that thread?

Why are not more atheists burning churches in this country to show their hate for religion?

Why don't we see religious leaders being murdered by atheists? If a religious leader is being murdered, it is usually done by someone of a different faith - for a religious reason.

Why has the absolutely insane Creationist Museum in Kentucky not been burnt to the ground by hateful atheists?

Why are no believers being attacked or ridiculed by hateful atheists on their way to church?

I really don't understand where you get this idea from that atheists hate religion and faith. I certainly don't hate it. I don't understand how a rational, intelligent person can subscribe to this concept - but if it makes them happy and helps them to become a better person, then fine.

hate is hate, and I agree that there are many that use religion as an excuse to be hateful. Sad but true.

But I'm still trying to understand what hate you're talking about that you say is coming from atheists. What are atheists doing to religious people?

DaphneLovesPR1NCE said:

Hasn't anyone noticed the *problems* that have been escalating since someone clever decided to take the idea of GOD out of society and schools? Even back in the old days, when it seemed that everybody believed in GOD, there were people that didn't. But usually, you didn't dare say it. Why? Because there was a stigma attached to this type of thing. The idea of an all-powerful GOD was good in keeping order amongst the people. Morality found its roots in GOD's commandments. The sad thing is, children and family units are the ones suffering from this lack of divine guidance the most. So if everyone were an atheist, there would be no happiness and no peace in this world, immorality would run rampant, and guaranteed, no one would think this society was better...except for maybe criminals!

OMG that's riddiculous

Some of the biggest criminals are religious leaders. Let us not forget it was a proclomation of faith and a loyalty to the church that protected many priests from arrest and conviction for child rape.

Various churches have killed, stolen, molested children, earned money from prostitution, Tortured and invested in weapons with a full knowledge of the "word of god and his commandments".

Also are you suggesting it's a good thing that people were too scared to say they didn't belive in god?

For many children it was the kind of twisted divine guidence that they recieved that has caused them to self harm, suffer long term feelings of low self worth and even suicide.

I will always be tolerant and try to stand individuals but I don't have to be tolerant of Ideology.

Gay/Queer/Trans people should no more be tolerant of religions than people of colour need to be tolerant of the KKK or Jewish people should be tolerant of Nazi ideology

A common ground should always be searched for but the idea that Morality is an exlusive quality held by religious people is frankly laughable

MrSoulpower said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

hate is hate, and I agree that there are many that use religion as an excuse to be hateful. Sad but true.

But I'm still trying to understand what hate you're talking about that you say is coming from atheists. What are atheists doing to religious people?

calling a believer mentally ill or saying the world would be a better place if there was no religion...

that is just as much of hate speech as ANY racist language can be.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

MrSoulpower said:

But I'm still trying to understand what hate you're talking about that you say is coming from atheists. What are atheists doing to religious people?

calling a believer mentally ill or saying the world would be a better place if there was no religion...

that is just as much of hate speech as ANY racist language can be.

I agree.

V10LETBLUES said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

calling a believer mentally ill or saying the world would be a better place if there was no religion...

that is just as much of hate speech as ANY racist language can be.

I agree.

to me calling something you do not like 'retarded' is at least as bad as calling something you do not like 'gay.' Why do we have to use such words as an insult? It is an insult to those that fall into that category?

OnlyNDaUsa said:

V10LETBLUES said:

I agree.

to me calling something you do not like 'retarded' is at least as bad as calling something you do not like 'gay.' Why do we have to use such words as an insult? It is an insult to those that fall into that category?

I completely agree. Especially about your point in questioning if "the world wouldn't be a better place without....." Which I agree is saying wouldn't it be better without those types of people.

I will agree that a lot of wrong is done by the of abuse religion and of people of faith by those with nefarious intentions. But the same can be said about almost anything and any group.

[Edited 12/13/10 17:57pm]

Here are some more articles/blogs:

http://marketplacechristi...today.html

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4076

V10LETBLUES said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

to me calling something you do not like 'retarded' is at least as bad as calling something you do not like 'gay.' Why do we have to use such words as an insult? It is an insult to those that fall into that category?

I completely agree. Especially about your point in questioning if "the world wouldn't be a better place without....." Which I agree is saying wouldn't it be better without those types of people.

I will agree that a lot of wrong is done by the of abuse religion and of people of faith by those with nefarious intentions. But the same can be said about almost anything and any group.

people do some messed up stuff. Some make up excuses.

http://edition.cnn.com/20...index.html

Key text from article:

“I am prepared to fight and die for my cause,” he wrote.“I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of human race and failures of natural selection.”

buist said:

http://edition.cnn.com/20...index.html

Key text from article:

“I am prepared to fight and die for my cause,” he wrote.“I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of human race and failures of natural selection.”

uhmmm but that guy didn't kill those people because they were believers and not atheists.........

so your point exactly was....??

so that guy was
- a Social Darwinist
- an Atheist
- a Skandinavian
- a bicycle driver
- a blonde guy
- a Trekkie

- a stamp collector

...and plenty of other things

he didn't KILL however in the name of Scandinavians, just as he didn't kill in the name of bicycle drivers, the shooting also was not motivated by Star Trek, stamps or blonde hair colour. and not by Atheism!

he justified his killings with natural selection (while he was doing exactly the opposite by the way: that would not be "natural" selection but "artificial" one, performed by him. so he didn't really understand the concept then, oh well, but however that's not the point)

accepting the biological FACT of natural selection and evolution does nowhere equal atheism, in case this was the point you were trying to imply...

[Edited 12/14/10 1:32am]