Religion thread #58,934

[Platapus]

I remember we had this Captain who said that he thought that non-christians should not be allowed to serve in the military.

[Safe-Keeper]

If you're right then why the constant stream of invective? Can atheists not declare their atheism without insulting religion?

Impossible, I'm afraid. It's the same way all white people are violent racists, Americans are all fat, and men are all sex offenders who prey on little girls. It's how we roll.

(/irony)

[Skybird]

Science, being conducted reasonably and responsibly, does not claim to know the answer to "Why", but it is good in examining the question of "How".

Religion does not care for either examing the question of "Why" or "How", it just raises claims and afterwards present them as facts, unchecked, and declares it a virtue to just blindly believe.

And in my opinion, quites ome of those smart minds science has seen, and quite some of those atheists, are anti-theistic, but not anti-religion. Atheism does not mean to be anti-spiritual. There are religions that are coming along without theistic concepts.

Christian mystics mentioned what they called the divine spark in creation, and i everything that exists, and you can see that much of what the tried to point at, often by saying what "it" is not, indicates they thought that God is not to be seen as a separate entitiy and creator of what exoists, but to be expressed in all that exists and thus every single part of creation IS God, or the divine. Buddhists would call it the Buddha-essence in all and everything. But originally, by Buddha'S teachings, Buddhism is a non-theistic or atheistic religion.

For theistic fundamentalists, claiming the above of course is nothing but heresy and blasphemy. They want their own little deity-in-the-pocket to make deals with when they feel sad, that is comfortable and feeds the illusion of being safe. To tell them that you and me and themj and all and everything actually is God, is often a reason for them to attack. "Do you now take it upon you to declare yourself a God?"

Not really. Not "a god", but "the God" , and not just me, but everything that I perceive and believe to be "existing".

What were those last words at the ending of this great movie, "A thin red line"? - Oh my soul, look out through my eyes, look at all those things you've made, all things shining."

The gardener is just a dream the garden dreams.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

If you share your popcorn Jim. I'll share my beer to wash it down with.

Your on

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

[August]

Lets not confuse belief in a God with adherence to a religion. They are not the same thing. Religion attempts to define what is essentially undefinable. I am a believer, but I am not religious.

[Sailor Steve]

Good point. There are believers who aren't religious and non-believers who are.

[August]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Good point. There are believers who aren't religious and non-believers who are.

Yeah and the latter is responsible for religions negative image.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by August

Yeah and the latter is responsible for religions negative image.

Now that's an awfully hypocritical (not applying to you personally, but rather the lack of criticism to one side in this issue generally) thing to say.

Religions do more than enough disservice to themselves without anyone haranguing them from the outside.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by August

Lets not confuse belief in a God with adherence to a religion. They are not the same thing. Religion attempts to define what is essentially undefinable. I am a believer, but I am not religious.

Organized Religion -- Any time you try to organize anything (Religion, Baseball game, Internet forum...) you have to start establishing rules and standards. Soon the organization becomes more important than that which is organized.

What we need is organized religion, not organized religion. If you catch my drift.

[Aramike]

As an atheist, everytime this discussion emerges I am startled by a simple observation:

Most theists tend to write measured, reasonable responses which disagrees with those with the notion of God or gods, and most atheists respond back with intolerance and accusations blaming damned near all the world's woes on religion.

In fact, that brand of athiest is better described as antitheist, and I suspect that their ranting and ravings about tolerance only exist in service of covering up their own inadaquecies about their inability to change from their own intolerance.

[August]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Now that's an awfully hypocritical (not applying to you personally, but rather the lack of criticism to one side in this issue generally) thing to say.

It's hypocritical that unbelievers posing as members of a church have done damage to the churches reputation? How again?

Religions do more than enough disservice to themselves without anyone haranguing them from the outside.

I think you misunderstood. I didn't say unbelievers from the outside of the church. I'm talking about those who would use the trappings of a church to further their own cause.

[krashkart]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Religions do more than enough disservice to themselves without anyone haranguing them from the outside.

It depends largely upon the individual, I think. Some are more hardcore than others in their quest for spiritual purity.



Edit:

[August]

Originally Posted by Aramike

As an atheist, everytime this discussion emerges I am startled by a simple observation:

Most theists tend to write measured, reasonable responses which disagrees with those with the notion of God or gods, and most atheists respond back with intolerance and accusations blaming damned near all the world's woes on religion.

In fact, that brand of athiest is better described as antitheist, and I suspect that their ranting and ravings about tolerance only exist in service of covering up their own inadaquecies about their inability to change from their own intolerance.

Mike thank you for understanding. I guess you're proof that not all Atheists are that way. Anti-theist is a good way to describe them.

[CCIP]

Oh, my apologies. I did get you wrong!

That said, occasionally the believing believers also get misguided pretty badly. But in general, I agree with you in that case.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Aramike

As an atheist, everytime this discussion emerges I am startled by a simple observation:

Most theists tend to write measured, reasonable responses which disagrees with those with the notion of God or gods, and most atheists respond back with intolerance and accusations blaming damned near all the world's woes on religion.

In fact, that brand of athiest is better described as antitheist, and I suspect that their ranting and ravings about tolerance only exist in service of covering up their own inadaquecies about their inability to change from their own intolerance.

I find intolerant posts coming from both sides. One thing to keep in mind is that on the Internets Tubes you will not be getting an accurate population participating in theological discussions. Many atheists wont even participate because they have nothing to prove nor a desire to persuade.

As an atheist, I rarely participate in religious discussions. It is not my bag, but, as an atheist, I have no desire to mock theists nor a desire to attempt to "convert" any theists.

The "atheists" you read mocking religion are either insecure in their beliefs (just like theists that feel they have to proclaim their faith) or they are just trolling jerks trying to stir things up.

I like to think that a "true" atheist is tolerant and understanding of other people's religions.

But then religion is a very emotional topic and people act/post emotionally on it.