Atheism thread

[deesidejambo]

48 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Take those bits out of the bible and stop brainwashing kids with it, then maybe we'll stop. Until then, it's open season.

 

The Bible is nothing more than a mind-control document

[LesJambes]

4 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Belief ------

 

Refer Maslows triangle of needs and part of the pinnacle is "self-actualisation", and part of this is an acceptance that there is a purpose to existence.    In other words there is a spiritual dimension to existence that is part of the peak of individual actualisation.    Why does the human race exist at all?

 

But whether people like it or not, "belief" in things that cannot be proven is a necessity for humans to evolve.  This is why even remote tribes in deep jungles have "gods".  The Aztecs, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Hindus etc etc etc all somehow ended up with belief in things existential to that which could be proven as material.  Were they all idiots too?

I'm not calling anyone an idiot. I will say if for example someone has access to information about evolution, and chooses to disregard scientific consensus because of a translation of a translation of ancient myths, that is somewhat wilful ignorance imo. That's their choice, but when they start to attack science then I'll fight back. Science literally gives us wings, cures diseases, let's us fly across the World, drive to work, watch football matches taking place across the World, talk to others on this very forum. If religion wants to fight science there's no question which side I'm taking.

 

Quote

But we are the same -

 

Some believe in God.  Some dont.

 

Some believe crop circles were made by aliens in flying saucers.    Some dont.

 

Some believe in Ickes reptilian theory.     Some dont.

 

Some believe 9/11 was an inside job.  Some dont.

 

Every person in KB will inevitably fall on one side or the other of each of the above (or a billion other examples), as already demonstrated in this thread.

 

Heres the problem - none of the above can be proven or disproven either way.     So belief of one side or the other is equally valid, whether atheists like it or not - they are simply on one side of the first one but it could be argued by Maslow that they will never reach self-actualisation.

I genuinely think you want to be argued out of religion here, maybe I'm wrong. But if so being atheist or agnostic doesn't mean you need to wear a fedora and shout at little old ladies going to church, it just means you don't go to church every week and pray to something that most likely doesn't answer back. But either way I think you understand why the reptilian theory is equally as valid as it's counterpart. If not do you think the flat earth theory is equally valid as it's opposite?

 

Quote

You cant prove the existence of God.   And you cant prove non-existence.  But posting silly memes to take the piss out of the other side of the same coin is a sign of, imo, inability to accept there may be a reason for existence that will stop them from reaching the Maslow pinnacle.

 

Religion..................

 

Is nothing to do with belief - religion is another human requirement - humans very nature is tribal.   We evolved from apes which are strongly tribal, and human tribes are still in existence to this day, and will remain for as long as the human race exists.

 

Religion and atheism are both manifestations of this, but there are many more examples of tribal behaviour -

 

Veganism

Hearts supporting

Tories.

Icke - believers

Train-spotters

etc

etc

 

Whether we like it or not, we associate with tribal norms and forsake our own ability to think for ourselves by the collective tribal opinion - for example when there is a 50/50 tackle we try to see it in Hearts favour but the vermin supporters will see the same tackle the other way.  We often can lose "objectivity".

 

So atheism, which is collective descriptor of a group of similar ideologies is nothing more or less than a manifestation of this.     For example, if there was a discovery of a body in a grave somewhere that tied in with the existence of Jesus, those who believe in Jesus will immediately accept it as proof, whilst atheists will try to discredit it - in other words both will come from a non-objective position whether we like it or not.

 

So imo atheists can be just as blind as religious types.       But jog on posting silly memes.

 

But dont get me started on the Church, which is just a mind-control establishment to control the masses.   The Church is imo evil.

Atheism is not an ideology though, it is simply a lack of belief in god. Do you believe in fairies? If not would it be fair for me to call that an ideology? Yes you can have ideologies which incorporate atheism as part of their dogma, some communists incorporate anti-clericalism for example. But atheism in and of itself is not an ideology. I'm an atheist and I believe Jesus existed, I've even heard compelling arguments for the tomb they discovered in Israel. But do I believe the creator of the entire universe chose to have sex with a 14yr old girl to give birth to himself and talk to himself to persuade others to be peaceful, and ultimately get killed but totally intentionally so he could sacrifice himself/ his son to forgive our original sin which he created us with? No, I don't believe that. It's not an ideology, I simply just don't believe it.

 

As for the dank memes well this is an atheist thread. Christians can go right ahead and create a Christian thread and post whatever christian maymays are doing the rounds. Or any other religion.

 

I think we can agree on churches though, maybe some day you'll come round to the atheist club. We have music and dancing, guilt free!

[deesidejambo]

2 minutes ago, LesJambes said:

I'm not calling anyone an idiot. I will say if for example someone has access to information about evolution, and chooses to disregard scientific consensus because of a translation of a translation of ancient myths, that is somewhat wilful ignorance imo. That's their choice, but when they start to attack science then I'll fight back. Science literally gives us wings, cures diseases, let's us fly across the World, drive to work, watch football matches taking place across the World, talk to others on this very forum. If religion wants to fight science there's no question which side I'm taking.

 

I genuinely think you want to be argued out of religion here, maybe I'm wrong. But if so being atheist or agnostic doesn't mean you need to wear a fedora and shout at little old ladies going to church, it just means you don't go to church every week and pray to something that most likely doesn't answer back. But either way I think you understand why the reptilian theory is equally as valid as it's counterpart. If not do you think the flat earth theory is equally valid as it's opposite?

 

Atheism is not an ideology though, it is simply a lack of belief in god. Do you believe in fairies? If not would it be fair for me to call that an ideology? Yes you can have ideologies which incorporate atheism as part of their dogma, some communists incorporate anti-clericalism for example. But atheism in and of itself is not an ideology. I'm an atheist and I believe Jesus existed, I've even heard compelling arguments for the tomb they discovered in Israel. But do I believe the creator of the entire universe chose to have sex with a 14yr old girl to give birth to himself and talk to himself to persuade others to be peaceful, and ultimately get killed but totally intentionally so he could sacrifice himself/ his son to forgive our original sin which he created us with? No, I don't believe that. It's not an ideology, I simply just don't believe it.

 

As for the dank memes well this is an atheist thread. Christians can go right ahead and create a Christian thread and post whatever christian maymays are doing the rounds. Or any other religion.

 

I think we can agree on churches though, maybe some day you'll come round to the atheist club. We have music and dancing, guilt free!

 

Thanks for the response.

 

I'm OK with agnostics.    To me an agnostic is open to persuasion either way.

 

But the problem with atheists (and religious spuds) is they have taken their position based on their interpretation of evidence.  Thats fine.   But because they have embedded themselves with their respective ideologies or world-views they are unlikely to change and will see evidence in different ways, i.e. the 50/50 tackle analogy.  They lose objectivity, and imo are two sides of the same coin.

 

but I still suggest that to achieve Maslows self-actualisation, you need to have a spiritual dimension in your life, otherwise why do you exist at all?

 

And heres an example of mind-control, a la The Bible.............

 

Many spuds on here indoctrinate their children to "be good" otherwise Santa wont come.    This is mind-control in its simplistic benevolent form, but it still is mind-control.  Unless of course you think Santa does exist...............................

 

 

[LesJambes]

Agnostic and atheist are not mutually exclusive, one is belief, the other is knowledge. So for example I am an agnostic atheist because I don't believe in any god or gods, but I don't claim to know that no gods exist.

[Maple Leaf]

16 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

Out of interest, where did you get the idea that there were no trees in the Levant?

Maybe Noah cut them all down to build his ark?

[Ray Gin]

 

[Bridge of Djoum]

17 hours ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

That's irregardless whether there is or not, the eternity-in-hell and beheading parts of religion are the somewhat more significant parts.

Replied to wrong post.

Edited March 11, 2018 by New York Fleapit

[lauriesrank]

GOd jobs are absolute mentals, if you were to go into a psych ward and tell them you truly believe in all that the various religious texts say you'b be sectioned (or whatever it's called nowadays) does anyone disagree with that??... NO, ok then.  Religion is a way of indoctrinating the masses to stymie their thought process, see the dark ages for proof.

 

Also re a post above, humans did NOT evolve from apes, good grief.

 

Yes, there are numerous people in the world who do magnificent things for others who believe in a higher power (although I doubt they believe in all of the scripture cause that is mental) there are also countless others who do magnificent things without the need of doctrine.

 

You want prrof that religion taints, see the 'sainted' anjeze gonkhe bojaxhiu (mother teresa,) who let people suffer and die all in the name of their god, that woman was an absolute (expletive) of the highest order and yet attained sainthood!  and thats just one church!  

 

Not even gonna go into all of the other abuse (mainly) children have suffered at the hands of their 'protectors' although I do know that that happens in positions of power and not just churches.

 

I despise religion and cannot see how it can be construed as 'for the betterment of mankind'

[Ray Gin]

1 hour ago, lauriesrank said:

 

Also re a post above, humans did NOT evolve from apes, good grief.

 

 

Wait...what? 

 

[Bindy Badgy]

4 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Wait...what? 

 

 

We share a common ancestor, which isn't the same as evolving from them.

 

That said, the distinction between homonids and apes is very blurry.

[Ray Gin]

Fair enough if he was just being pedantic about the terminology. I thought he was an evolution denier for a moment there.

[lauriesrank]

13 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

Fair enough if he was just being pedantic about the terminology. I thought he was an evolution denier for a moment there.

You'd need to be on serious drugs to deny evolution, apart from that, I studied it! lolz

[peter_hmfc]

4 hours ago, New York Fleapit said:

Replied to wrong post.

 

Surprised you can see any of my posts to be honest. I thought you blocked me when you threw a hissy fit after I made fun of your shoes?

[Irufushi]

 

[Ray Gin]

A couple of quotes from Sir David Attenborough:

 

Quote

“If somebody says to me 'I believe every word of the Bible is true', you can’t argue against that degree of irrationality… there is actually a way of looking at the natural world and seeing the evidence and it’s all there. And what’s more it’s the same evidence whether it’s in Australia or Northern Europe or wherever. It’s all the same — it all produces the same answer and you can all see the evidence — if you reject that then there’s nothing I can say.”

 

 

Quote

"When creationists talk about God creating every individual species as a separate act, they always instance hummingbirds, or orchids, sunflowers and beautiful things. But I tend to think instead of a parasitic worm that is boring through the eye of a boy sitting on the bank of a river in West Africa, a worm that’s going to make him blind.  

 

And I ask them, ‘Are you telling me that the God you believe in, who you also say is an all-merciful God, who cares for each one of us individually, are you saying that God created this worm that can live in no other way than in an innocent child’s eyeball? Because that doesn’t seem to me to coincide with a God who’s full of mercy."

 

 

Edited March 11, 2018 by Ray Gin

[Irufushi]

Attenborough knows the score ?

[jake]

For all those as UA says simply dismissing religious belief in a cartoon type way .

You cannot deny that our society for all it's faults is the result of Christian values.

You may blame it for wickedness but credit it you will not.

Also I think it's fair to point out that all ideology however well intentioned always has those who bend it to suit.

 

Religion is a belief .

Belief can never be proved.

 

Atheists may believe that for instance that some of Einstein's findings were true.

We now know that they may not be.

Thought and belief evolve.

Religious beliefs are not dissimilar all have the same wisdoms and all have things that are at least questionable.

But can we really be sure there is no afterlife that our consciousness is only in reality electrical signals in our brain.

 

Atheism is imo to close your mind to not only religion but science.

We are already looking at 4 dimensions and the infinity of math .

 

Atheism is imo ignorance

[Ray Gin]

Atheism is closing your mind to science? Do explain. Let me strap in.

[@VladMagic]

Havent read the thread so maybe off topic.

 

I have had red wine.

 

God exists because there are tits and ******s.

 

God does not exist because there are gingers.

 

 

[John Frum]

24 minutes ago, jake said:

For all those as UA says simply dismissing religious belief in a cartoon type way .

You cannot deny that our society for all it's faults is the result of Christian values.

You may blame it for wickedness but credit it you will not.

Also I think it's fair to point out that all ideology however well intentioned always has those who bend it to suit.

 

Religion is a belief .

Belief can never be proved.

 

Atheists may believe that for instance that some of Einstein's findings were true.

We now know that they may not be.

Thought and belief evolve.

Religious beliefs are not dissimilar all have the same wisdoms and all have things that are at least questionable.

But can we really be sure there is no afterlife that our consciousness is only in reality electrical signals in our brain.

 

Atheism is imo to close your mind to not only religion but science.

We are already looking at 4 dimensions and the infinity of math .

 

Atheism is imo ignorance

What an ignorant post imo

 

(am I doing this right?)

[jake]

9 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

Atheism is closing your mind to science? Do explain. Let me strap in.

Atheism is the belief or the disbelief in God or Gods yes?

 

Yet science now puts forward 4th dimension  and infinity mathematics.

 

Both make for the possibility of anything.

You close your mind to that.

You are exactly the thing you criticise .

Dogmatic and unwilling to accept a different view of life.

[jake]

3 minutes ago, John Frum said:

What an ignorant post imo

 

(am I doing this right?)

Yes.

[Ray Gin]

There is currently no scientific evidence that supports the existence of any Gods. Atheists would change their mind if evidence was produced.

[deesidejambo]

13 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

There is currently no scientific evidence that supports the existence of any Gods. Atheists would change their mind if evidence was produced.

This is true.   But there is also no scientific evidence that there isn’t. Religious spuds would also change their minds if there was.

 

its two sides of the same coin.

 

but the possibility that there is some sort of spiritual existence whether it be god or something else like Chi will always be there and can never be disproven by science.

 

May the Force be with you.

[jake]

9 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

There is currently no scientific evidence that supports the existence of any Gods. Atheists would change their mind if evidence was produced.

Can I ask if there is anything you believe in ?

A theology political or otherwise?

Or do you just believe in facts?

 

Because what was once regarded as fact is now no more .

Science only offers what we know at this time.

Belief is only belief.

I just find the contempt for people with faith who do no harm and especially the contempt for prayer.

Which by the way most people use to make themselves a better person .

I just don't get the anger.

Also it has to be said that this contempt especially on this forum is concentrated on Christianity.

Which is ironic given that those who live in societies where this is or was the predominant culture are in fact the most liberal and fair.

 

[Bindy Badgy]

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

 

Quote

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

 

[Ray Gin]

Just now, jake said:

Can I ask if there is anything you believe in ?

A theology political or otherwise?

Or do you just believe in facts?

 

Because what was once regarded as fact is now no more .

Science only offers what we know at this time.

Belief is only belief.

I just find the contempt for people with faith who do no harm and especially the contempt for prayer.

Which by the way most people use to make themselves a better person .

I just don't get the anger.

Also it has to be said that this contempt especially on this forum is concentrated on Christianity.

Which is ironic given that those who live in societies where this is or was the predominant culture are in fact the most liberal and fair.

 

 

 

My beliefs are fluid and follow the evidence. If new evidence is uncovered, then I can change my mind. Such is the beauty of science and rational thinking.

 

[Ray Gin]

How have "thoughts and prayers" been helping out America with their gun control problems, by the way? It seems like they are doing more harm than good to me.

 

Thoughts and prayers just encourage people to pin their hopes on a magical sky fairy to fix things for them instead of actually taking measures required to solve the problem themselves.

[jake]

3 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

How have "thoughts and prayers" been helping out America with their gun control problems, by the way? It seems like they are doing more harm than good to me.

 

Thoughts and prayers just encourage people to pin their hopes on a magical sky fairy to fix things for them instead of actually taking measures required to solve the problem themselves.

What's your answer to the gun problem and who do you pin your hopes to?

 

What's your answer to any problem and what do you pin your hopes to?

 

Because every political regime in the US spouts those words.

 

[jake]

10 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

 

My beliefs are fluid and follow the evidence. If new evidence is uncovered, then I can change my mind. Such is the beauty of science and rational thinking.

 

So you in theory cannot believe in anything or if you follow current scientific theory believe that anything is possible.

 

[Ray Gin]

1 minute ago, jake said:

What's your answer to the gun problem and who do you pin your hopes to?

 

What's your answer to any problem and what do you pin your hopes to?

 

Because every political regime in the US spouts those words.

 

 

For a start, a complete ban on the purchase of automatic weapons, far tighter controls on who can legally purchase guns, a ban on anyone with a record of mental illness or a criminal record having a gun. All of these would be more effective than thoughts and prayers.

 

What's my answer to any problem? I'd probably google it. Far more answers than the sky fairy has ever produced. 

[jake]

Just now, Ray Gin said:

 

For a start, a complete ban on the purchase of automatic weapons, far tighter controls on who can legally purchase guns, a ban on anyone with a record of mental illness or a criminal record having a gun. All of these would be more effective than thoughts and prayers.

 

What's my answer to any problem? I'd probably google it. Far more answers than the sky fairy has ever produced. 

All good.

But who or what do you pin your hopes on to deliver that.

 

Google it .

 

Will it be socialism

Capitalism

Democrats 

Republicans.

 

You might mock thoughts and prayers but they are as realistic as any of the above.

 

[Ray Gin]

3 minutes ago, jake said:

So you in theory cannot believe in anything or if you follow current scientific theory believe that anything is possible.

 

How can I not believe in anything? You've lost me there.

 

And there is no credible scientific theory I've read that indicate that anything is possible. Where have you read such a thing?

[LesJambes]

1 hour ago, jake said:

For all those as UA says simply dismissing religious belief in a cartoon type way .

You cannot deny that our society for all it's faults is the result of Christian values.

14th century society was the result of christian values, yes. But the Enlightenment was largely a rejection of religion, increased secularism and the flourishing of arts, philosophy, science, and human rights that came about as a result.

 

Quote

You may blame it for wickedness but credit it you will not.

Also I think it's fair to point out that all ideology however well intentioned always has those who bend it to suit.

Okay, but some beliefs are easier to 'bend' than others. For example 'thou shalt not suffer a witch to live' makes it fairly easy to justify murder from a Biblical perspective.

 

36 minutes ago, jake said:

Atheism is the belief or the disbelief in God or Gods yes?

 

Yet science now puts forward 4th dimension  and infinity mathematics.

Those things prove the existence of Thor and Zeus, not the Christian God.

 

Quote

Both make for the possibility of anything.

You close your mind to that.

You are exactly the thing you criticise .

Dogmatic and unwilling to accept a different view of life.

Okay so join Islam. Don't be closed-minded, and unwilling to accept a different view of life. Go to your local Mosque and pray.

[Unknown user]

[jake]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

How can I not believe in anything? You've lost me there.

 

And there is no credible scientific theory I've read that indicate that anything is possible. Where have you read such a thing?

Infinity theory.

If math can explain then any calculation can always have + 1.

I think it's known as the fingerprint of God.

Look Ray I'm just spraffin .

But if your thoughts are fluid and need scientific confirmation then you have no belief other than the things you are told.

 

It's as fake as those with religious belief.

 

But not as half radge as me mate ?

[jake]

5 minutes ago, LesJambes said:

14th century society was the result of christian values, yes. But the Enlightenment was largely a rejection of religion, increased secularism and the flourishing of arts, philosophy, science, and human rights that came about as a result.

 

Okay, but some beliefs are easier to 'bend' than others. For example 'thou shalt not suffer a witch to live' makes it fairly easy to justify murder from a Biblical perspective.

 

Those things prove the existence of Thor and Zeus, not the Christian God.

 

Okay so join Islam. Don't be closed-minded, and unwilling to accept a different view of life. Go to your local Mosque and pray.

The ten commandments.

I don't practice religion.

 

Christian society is quite evidently a better place for people to live freely and express themselves in a much wider sense than any Islamic state.

 

And it is evidently more just.

 

That is undeniable

[jake]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Perhaps its a common wisdom seperated by politics .

Perhaps not.

But Ricki Gervais is not exactly Aristotle now is he?'

[Unknown user]

Just now, jake said:

Perhaps its a common wisdom seperated by politics .

Perhaps not.

But Ricki Gervais is not exactly Aristotle now is he?'

Why does he need to be Aristotle to see religion for what it is?

[jake]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Why does he need to be Aristotle to see religion for what it is?

True enough.

[Ray Gin]

10 minutes ago, jake said:

Infinity theory.

If math can explain then any calculation can always have + 1.

I think it's known as the fingerprint of God.

Look Ray I'm just spraffin .

But if your thoughts are fluid and need scientific confirmation then you have no belief other than the things you are told.

 

It's as fake as those with religious belief.

 

But not as half radge as me mate ?

 

You've certainly ceased making any sense now.

 

The ability to add one to any number doesn't make anything possible.

[jake]

What i would say Smithee is there are many different takes on wisdom.

Or in fact political views.

They are all real to those that hold them.

Ricky Gervais holds his views on some things is his the truth.

We can mock anyone .

But it seems to me that the mockery against those with certain views political and religious involves a bigotry in this thread and others.

And ironically it comes from those posters who deem themselves liberal.

[jake]

5 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

You've certainly ceased making any sense now.

 

The ability to add one to any number doesn't make anything possible.

It does mathematically.

Which is what Science in essence is.

 

[Ray Gin]

Just now, jake said:

It does mathematically.

Which is what Science in essence is.

 

 

No it doesn't.

How does the ability to add one to any random number alter any of the laws of physics?

[jake]

5 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

No it doesn't.

How does the ability to add one to any random number alter any of the laws of physics?

The laws of physics are applicable to known dimensions.

These are explained by mathematics.

There is now I think the general agreement of a 4th dimension in science.

For example the speed of light is no longer regarded as the fastest speed.

So if the law of physics is explained in mathematical terms then the plus 1 is the theory of infinity.

It's just that a theory.

 

The only true science is one of experiment.

Which renders much of what we think we know untrue.

 

 

 

Edit.

I could give examples of unproved science if you like but you wouldn't like it?

I could also give you examples of experimental science which disproves what we are told is true but isn't but that would take this thread into tinfoil hat territory.

☺

Edited March 11, 2018 by jake

[LesJambes]

1 hour ago, jake said:

The ten commandments.

I don't practice religion.

 

Christian society is quite evidently a better place for people to live freely and express themselves in a much wider sense than any Islamic state.

 

And it is evidently more just.

 

That is undeniable

How many of the ten commandments are law? Just one, 'thou shalt not kill', and within that there is a spectrum of cuplability, from manslaughter to murder. The west aren't really christian societies, and haven't been for a long time. They are largely secular, not run by the church but elected government. The difference between Western states and Islamic states is better explained by the difference between secular democracies and theocratic dictatorships than Christianity and Islam.

 

1 hour ago, jake said:

Perhaps its a common wisdom seperated by politics .

Perhaps not.

But Ricki Gervais is not exactly Aristotle now is he?'

Aristotle was atheist and secularist. It's ironic you should bring him up here.

 

1 hour ago, jake said:

The laws of physics are applicable to known dimensions.

These are explained by mathematics.

There is now I think the general agreement of a 4th dimension in science.

For example the speed of light is no longer regarded as the fastest speed.

So if the law of physics is explained in mathematical terms then the plus 1 is the theory of infinity.

It's just that a theory.

 

The only true science is one of experiment.

Which renders much of what we think we know untrue.

 

 

 

Edit.

I could give examples of unproved science if you like but you wouldn't like it?

I could also give you examples of experimental science which disproves what we are told is true but isn't but that would take this thread into tinfoil hat territory.

☺

Again I get this feeling you are here because on some level you want people to talk you out of religion. I could be wrong, but that's the sense I'm getting. Anyway with regard to the god of the gaps argument, it's easy to retrospectively apply scientific knowledge to Christianity (or Islam, or Buddhism) but there are no actual predictions in the bible. No mention of cancer,  let alone it's cure (though of course if the cure is found then no doubt some vaguely relevant passage will be pointed to as a 'I told you so!') no explanation of anything beyond the limited knowledge of the time, and many of the mistakes of the time. It's very difficult to conclude religions were made by anything other than a human being, limited by their time and knowledge.

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

I don't care either way, to be honest. Live and let live. Tell you what I have noticed since the rise of t'Internet, twitter, facebook etc. - I see far more atheists than religious types living with absolute conviction, holding onto dogmatic 'truth', spreading the word, trying to convince others.

[ADAM]

1 hour ago, Eldar Hadzimehmedovic said:

I don't care either way, to be honest. Live and let live. Tell you what I have noticed since the rise of t'Internet, twitter, facebook etc. - I see far more atheists than religious types living with absolute conviction, holding onto dogmatic 'truth', spreading the word, trying to convince others.

Really?

More like people seeking to challenge long standing religious privilege in society.

Privilege that includes:

Enforced religious observance in all state schools.

Access of evangelical religious groups in state schools like Scripture Union (see their website for real dogma!).

An official state religion (Church of England) with the unelected Head of State as its leader.

26 unelected Bishops in the House of Lords.

Unelected, with full voting rights, 3 religious representatives on all Scottish local authority education committees.

Enforced prayer at the start of Local Council meetings and at Westminster.

Religious exemption from UK equality laws.

The refusal of the state to recognise the non-religious (such as the Humanist Society in England) at certain state events e.g. Remembrance Day at the Cenotaph or to conduct marriages.

The ongoing battle in Skye with the religious on the local authority refusing to open the council run sports centre on Sundays despite strong local support to do so.

 

The list of religous privilege allowing them to enforce their views and influence on all sectors of society goes on and on.

 

 

 

Edited March 12, 2018 by ADAM

[John Gentleman]

14 hours ago, deesidejambo said:

But dont get me started on the Church, which is just a mind-control establishment to control the masses.   The Church is imo evil.

 

 

 

 

 

There's an abundance of evidence to demonstrate that greater levels of secular education lead to lower levels of religious belief (Hungerman et al) in all populations, irrespective of the prevailing tradition (Christian, Muslim, Hindhu etc).

I've no doubt that fear coupled with promise (stick & carrot) has been/continues to be a strategy employed by religions to keep their flocks in line. Quite why they use this approach eludes me. Emotional and material gain derived from proscribed adherence, perhaps?

Increasingly—and globally—it's now being met with the two finger salute. And that's no bad thing for humanity IMO.

[michael_bolton]

17 hours ago, Ray Gin said:

 

 

 

The fact that that quote exists shows that the quote itself is false.

 

People who don't collect stamps simply don't collect stamps. They don't write books about not collecting stamps; they don't put thousands of videos on Youtube about not collecting stamps; they don't have famous evangelists for the cause of not collecting stamps (such as this quote); they don't evangelise to their friends about not collecting stamps; they don't regularly comment on the harmful nature of the practice of collecting stamps.

 

Atheism is a belief system for sure. While it is not a uniform belief system, neither is any other religion. For example, atheists will disagree with each other on many aspects of morality, meaning (or lack of) of life, the beginnings of life etc, but so do other religions. Ask two baptists a detailed list of questions about ethics, science, and meaning in life, and you'll get two different sets of answers. Atheism is not special in that regard.

 

Atheists have a dogmatic position on God, in that they believe that there isn't one. If you're unsure about this, then you're an agnostic, not an atheist. Religions have a dogmatic position on God. People who disagree with their position are 'wrong', and atheism shares this behaviour. Religious people evangelise for their faith. Atheists evengelise for their faith (and, like Christian evangelists, many of them make an absolute fortune doing so). This thread is an easy example. This is not promotion as in the promotion of Hearts by wearing a Hearts top. I doubt any of us regularly sits with Aberdeen-supporting friends and tries to convince them to become Hearts supporters. Yet atheists and people of faith both share this behaviour.

 

So, basically it comes down to what you mean by 'religion'. I'm wary about applying the word to atheism because of its lack of any kind of supernatural belief. But, in practice, this is just a technicality. I think on a day-to-day basis the behaviour of atheists and the shape of atheism strongly resembles that of standard religions.