In Atheists We Distrust

[jayron]

This is not true.
There were many parts of the history where believers were persecuted by non believers .
Jews were exterminated by Germans that in that time were nationalists , not funded of religion.
Christians were persecuted by Romans, which had nothing to do about religion war but a war against a religion.
Best exemple is Russia after the revolution made an anti religious policy. I don't know much China but was it some kind of anti religion policy?
Of course some muslim nations christian nations kill, not all the time in the name of religion.
sometimes some fanatic groups kill in the name of religion but really hopefully you didn't consider believers to be all fanatics.

Nazis were not atheists and neither were the Romans. Communism is a political and social system and atheism was a part of it. But often, communism is clubbed with cult worship of individuals like Stalin, Lenin, Mao and Kim Il Sung. It almost becomes religious. I still believe atheists don't kill believers for their atheistic principles but religious people do.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

In other words, you need a pointer, in your case a sound to perceive what is unimaginable and un-sayable. Your mind isn't evolved enough to grasp what is God without limiting him to a word, same as what mainstream Hindus do with deities.

Abir, I appreciate what mainstream Hindus say, but they and I are saying different things, you only need to look more finely. I am not reducing God to a word, absolutely not. I can feel the presence of God through an inner perception, and my mind can grasp His existence, but how do I tell you this...through language. There's a clear difference. God told us Himself one is fine with Him and the other is not.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

I know what Jihad literally meant(although different Islamic scholars have different opinions about it) but let's not fret over rhetoric, the point I was trying to make is that religion or the flawed interpretation of it can be used for political purpose. Same as crusade, individual Christian can be of good qualities and God fearing person, however all that goodness gets nullified when the religion is used to prop up emotion en masse.

You know what one thing means and still let others' perception drive you to use it in a different sense? Wouldn't you want to defend your understanding, even more so when it is correct? In French the word god means a dildo, now if a French guy starts talking about the latter, won't you say hey that's not what we're talking about?

Again, whether something is used as a political rallying cry does not nullify its primary meanings. The Romans might have fought the Crusades regardless of their faith if they saw their main cultural centres change sides. If socialism is used as a political ideal to justify a war, it doesn't decimate the value of socialism as an idea.

Politics, as far as i can perceive, always make use of existing frameworks and ideas to marshal support for those in possession or in quest of power. I thought education helped people to see through that, but apparently it doesn't.

 

[Unbeliever]

...start believing in atheism

one does not "start believing" in atheism.. One "becomes an atheist" i.e. does not believe in any religion (theism) any more. Atheism is not a believe but the absence of religious believe..

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

... I still believe atheists don't kill believers for their atheistic principles but religious people do.

Do I read this as "religious people kill people by principle, atheists just kill people, period"?

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

one does not "start believing" in atheism.. One "becomes an atheist" i.e. does not believe in any religion (theism) any more. Atheism is not a believe but the absence of religious believe..

Isn't not believing in religion a belief in areligiosity?

As far as I can tell, peoples have naturally tended to believe in God, and an atheist takes the reactionary position of saying "I don't believe you, and you and you, and you...". So, wouldn't disbelief in any religion constitute a religion?

 

[ApparentRaceTraitor]

What if some do have Divine leave? What if you failed in your understanding of those men?

What if nobody is assuming anything? What if it is direct knowledge handed down?

Why are atheists so arrogant that they presume their hypothesis is strictly the correct one?

And one of the big questions: what happens to atheists when they die? If you have no sense of afterlife, then even this life is ...useless.

Bro, discussions like these lead to unnecessary flame-wars, unless both parties to the discussion are willing to admit that there is a chance of their stance being proved wrong. Speaking for myself, I consider faith a luxury that I can never have, simply because I've seen what organized religion is capable of. I cannot reconcile myself with hating a person just because some book says that person is meant to be condemned unless there is significant proof that the person is meant to be hated (case in point: I believe that homosexuals/transsexuals/little people have every right to be treated just like a straight person would be, versus pedophiles/mass murderers/rapists receiving the harshest justice possible)

Anyhoo, first question
Fine so lets say Moses did go up Mt. Sinai and by some divine miracle he did receive 10 instructions to mankind which 'God' directed him to deliver to mankind, and people buy that left, right and center. So in today's world, what's stopping me from going to my room, smoking a bunch of mary jane and then declaring to the world that I have just received a revelation from 'God' that all other religions are abominations and that everyone should just have one giant orgy to get all their hate out of their system. I'd probably be diagnosed with schizophrenia/multiple personality disorder even before I get to complete the sentence "I have just received a revelation from God...."

Second question
Direct knowledge still should have some sort of basis over which it can be tried and tested no?
Gravity can be tested, the reaction between francium and water can be tested because these matters have had someone pondering the reason behind why they act the way they do, and hence we can refer to these.

Third question
I don't know about other atheists, but I am currently 6/10 on the atheist scale leaning towards 4/10 on the deist scale. I am open to being proved wrong. In fact I hope I am proved wrong with undeniable proof that a merciful and benevolent creator exists. Granted that he/she is in a way like a parent, who expects us to learn from our mistakes as some of the books say, but do you expect your kids (if you have any) to worship the ground you walk on 24/7?

Fourth question
We came from nature and we will return to it some day, the circle of life goes on. All that talk about not living in the past and looking forward to the future is a stumbling block, i grant you that, but for all you know it's nothingness after this or it could actually be something to look forward to, we'll either find out when we die, or we won't. Makes it all the more imperative to live for the moment and let live at the same time otherwise that's exactly what life would be.....useless.

Like I said before, we all have our own stances on the subject and debating like this without anyone of us considering the possibility that we could be wrong. On a lighter note, I hope none of y'all expect an essay like this again.

 

[darkinsky]

^^ dude you are not even half intellectual

first tell me, what sort of intelligent guy 'professes' to ban all religion practice from public and 'keep it personal' then come here and blows his mental farts and imposing on people what you believe, this is hypocricy

get off and do as you say, keep your atheism personal, no need to impose it on the people

 

[ApparentRaceTraitor]

^^ dude you are not even half intellectual

first tell me, what sort of intelligent guy 'professes' to ban all religion practice from public and 'keep it personal' then come here and blows his mental farts and imposing on people what you believe, this is hypocricy

get off and do as you say, keep your atheism personal, no need to impose it on the people

I never claimed to be an intellectual, princess. I said if it was up to me, and it is not, so stop getting your knickers in a twist kay?

 

[Bang Galore]

"Atheistic Religions".... umm wut?

Common problem. Just because they are all called religions doesn't mean that they are similar to your own. There exists, among many who subscribe to the Abrahamic religions, the idea that somehow other religions have a similar but (obviously) wrong interpretation of a creator God. That, however is only relevant to the other Abrahamic faiths & makes it generally impossible for followers of those faiths to comprehend eastern religions which are not of the same stock.

Buddhism & Jainism are "atheistic" because they do not believe in the existence of God & are for the most part, contemptuous of the idea. The Upanishads which are among Hinduism's holiest scriptures (& the most reasoned out) are dismissive to the most part about the existence of God/s. Atheism is an accepted thought as one of the facets of Hinduism.

Just because something is called a religion does not mean God necessarily follows as an integral part.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

... come here and blows his mental farts and imposing on people what you believe, this is hypocricy

get off and do as you say, keep your atheism personal, no need to impose it on the people

Sorry his reply is too long and I haven't read it, but you're not being a good advocate of theism one bit.

I apologize on your behalf.

 

[LaBong]

You know what one thing means and still let others' perception drive you to use it in a different sense? Wouldn't you want to defend your understanding, even more so when it is correct? In French the word god means a dildo, now if a French guy starts talking about the latter, won't you say hey that's not what we're talking about?

Actually I was trying to be polite but in effect Jihad essentially means Holy war against infidels. Now you can sugar coat it in whatever way you want but Muslim clerics are law unto themselves and sooner or later someone will call for Jihad against infidels just as they have been calling for last millennium. You need understand, meaning of a particular word evolve with time depending on the use of the same. Taliban meant students back in 80s.

Again, whether something is used as a political rallying cry does not nullify its primary meanings. The Romans might have fought the Crusades regardless of their faith if they saw their main cultural centres change sides. If socialism is used as a political ideal to justify a war, it doesn't decimate the value of socialism as an idea.

Politics, as far as i can perceive, always make use of existing frameworks and ideas to marshal support for those in possession or in quest of power. I thought education helped people to see through that, but apparently it doesn't.

There must be something inherently wrong in the very idea of religion that it can be used as political tool to prop up the gullible, and that wrong lies in the perception of true God/my God is better than your God.

 

[RazPaK]

Actually I was trying to be polite but in effect Jihad essentially means Holy war against infidels. Now you can sugar coat it in whatever way you want but Muslim clerics are law unto themselves and sooner or later someone will call for Jihad against infidels just as they have been calling for last millennium. You need understand, meaning of a particular word evolve with time depending on the use of the same. Taliban meant students back in 80s.

Jihad is arabic means literally "resistance" or "struggle".

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Nazis were not atheists and neither were the Romans. Communism is a political and social system and atheism was a part of it. But often, communism is clubbed with cult worship of individuals like Stalin, Lenin, Mao and Kim Il Sung. It almost becomes religious. I still believe atheists don't kill believers for their atheistic principles but religious people do.

It is not about religion specifically, but any strong ideology.

Nationalism being the most obvious one.

 

[LaBong]

Jihad is arabic means literally "resistance" or "struggle".

I know. The point I'm trying to make it hasn't been used in context of resisting only.