|
Post by Liberian Girl on Jan 4, 2018 21:12:56 GMT
Of course, you can not believe in the Bible or the Quran or any scripture and still believe in God. Everyone can make up an idea of a god in their mind that makes them feel comfortable. Your neighbor may have his idea of a god as well, which may be totally contradictory to yours. Which shows how subjective belief is. I think that's a fair point, but I still think that people having different ideas about what "God" is like doesn't change whether he/she/it exists at all. All it does is highlight out limited understanding. Ten thousand different people can have a different way of explaining what love feels like to them, that doesn't mean everyone is wrong, or that love doesn't exist to them - it only means that as humans we all go by our own experience or limited set of skills to grasp something.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jan 5, 2018 6:41:28 GMT
Well, when there are contradictory ideas of who or what God is then they cannot all be simultaneously true. And who is to tell whose version of a God is true? If any is true at all.
As for the existence of a God - it needs to be proven by those who claim he/she/it exists, not the other way around. Until that happens I have no reason to believe he/she/it exists. People's "gut feelings" mean little to me in that regard. "Gut feelings" are often wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Liberian Girl on Jan 5, 2018 9:52:01 GMT
Well, when there are contradictory ideas of who or what God is then they cannot all be simultaneously true. And who is to tell whose version of a God is true? If any is true at all. As for the existence of a God - it needs to be proven by those who claim he/she/it exists, not the other way around. Until that happens I have no reason to believe he/she/it exists. People's "gut feelings" mean little to me in that regard. "Gut feelings" are often wrong. I understand that. I'm not saying what I'm saying to try to convince anyone about God. More just explaining my own take on it. To me the clues of there being something more is life itself, this world, the intricate designs, details, the fact there is something not nothing. I just don't expect to understand what that idea of God is - it's just a name used for that force. But we've discussed that before and I know you don't believe life means there's a God. That's fair enough. But it's my take on it and the reason I have that "instinct" of belief in something outside of the laws of nature as we know it
|
|
|
Post by Snow White on Jan 8, 2018 5:01:43 GMT
I saw this on Tumblr and he/she couldn't be more wrong:
Religions are ideas, people are allowed to disagree, criticize and even hate ideas because they don't have rights, humans do. If people hate others for being adherents of religions different than theirs, they're bigots, if they hate due to their ethnicity and skin color, that's what make them racists. Islam is not an ethnicity, not all Semite people are Jewish and as a woman I have many reasons to be angry at Christianity. Religions including Christianity have encouraged misogyny in the world, Christianity interferes with women's reproductive system, sex life, contraceptives, family planning. But nowadays is nowhere near as extreme as Islam is towards women.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jan 8, 2018 6:18:02 GMT
LOL, those are a lot of strawman arguments. Atheism is racist, antisemitic and Islamophobic how? Atheists are many different people and as all groups of people I am sure there are racists among them. But I am also sure not more than among Christians, Muslims or any other group of people. Possibly rather less. I guess the charge of "antisemitism" and "Islamophobia" is twisting the criticism of religions - inlcuding Judaism or Islam - into that. As you said, it is a common fallacy from religious people (especially Muslims) to say that their religion being criticized (which is an ideology, not a race) equals to a form of racism (Islamophobia). It's a strategy to kill any criticism of that ideology in the bud, because they know that no one wants to be called a racist or a "phobic" of any kind and labelling people works in silencing any valid criticism. And the joke is on this poster because then he/she goes on to stereotype atheists as one kind of people: "a white male disgruntled ex-Christian who decided that if he can’t find joy in religion, then nobody else can".
I for one could not care less who finds joy in religion. I never shove my atheism down people's throats. I keep conversations about it to message boards like this with people who are also interested. Like all groups of people I know atheists too have zealots, who go out of their way to "proselytize" religious people, but to generalize atheism based on them is like generalizing Christianity based on the door-knocking Jehova's Witnesses.
That atheists have their platforms on the Internet, Universities, academia, media, books etc. to say what they think of the world - that is nothing wrong. Religious folks had those platforms exclusively for themselves for centuries (well, obviously not the Internet, LOL).
And the whining about how atheism wants to kill joy in life is ridiculous and more telling about the religious mindset than anything. If you need some sort of unproven fairy tale to feel joy in life then I don't think that's the atheist's problem. They see atheism as "destruction" because it threatens their fairy tales. What else does it "destroy"? How does it kill joy? I have more joy in my life since I am an atheist than before because I am much more free in thought, there are much more interesting and intellectually exciting things to discover. How is it pessimist? Because it does not assure you with a lie that you are going to live on forever? I don't find that pessimistic. Living forever wouldn't be as much fun as people think anyway (when you really think about it). There is nothing pessimistic to me about accepting the fact that our lives have an end. It's just being a realist and being grown up enough to be able to accept reality and life as it is, without the need to believe in unproven, self-assuring fairy tales.
|
|
|
Post by Snow White on Jan 9, 2018 5:41:35 GMT
I think some of them can't deal with the fact our life is finite and they want to comfort themselves they'll have another one in heaven. If they choose to find joy in religion is up to them but it's a a fake happiness because what they believe is bunch of lies.
I want to believe I don't shove my atheism down people's throats but sometimes I can't help myself and I mock those beliefs you'd never see me telling them they should stop believing in gods and being religious to be atheists instead. Even if I have zero respect for their ideologies, I'd never take away their right to believe what they want but it's frustrating and unfair they want to make us what we're not because they can't stand the criticism and scrutiny believing in something without evidence implies. Unfortunately for them, inquisition was abolished in the 19th century.
|
|
|
Post by Liberian Girl on Jan 9, 2018 9:13:57 GMT
I think some of them can't deal with the fact our life is finite and they want to comfort themselves... Comfort?? Not really. Anyone who has read parts of the bible can see there are loads of harsh, difficult or challenging ways they are asked to believe or live by. That's why it makes me laugh when people say, "ah, they want a fluffy fairy tale to believe in." Really? Have people read stuff about eternal separation, sin, hell, the commandments? It ain't no fluffy The Little Mermaid, that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jan 9, 2018 17:35:31 GMT
I think some of them can't deal with the fact our life is finite and they want to comfort themselves... Comfort?? Not really. Anyone who has read parts of the bible can see there are loads of harsh, difficult or challenging ways they are asked to believe or live by. That's why it makes me laugh when people say, "ah, they want a fluffy fairy tale to believe in." Really? Have people read stuff about eternal separation, sin, hell, the commandments? It ain't no fluffy The Little Mermaid, that's for sure. While it is true that the Bible is actually not that "fluffy" (or the Quran, for that matter), but it is also true that a lot of Christians (or Muslims) do cherry-pick their holy scriptures and take the fluffy parts out of it and create an image of a God out of those while ignoring the parts based on which God looks nothing short of an unpredictable psychopath. That is why you will see many Christians declare "God is love", "God is good" etc. when if you objectively read the Bible that is not actually the image of God that you will get from it. But many religious people either ignore those less fluffy parts or they don't even know about them (many religious people don't actually read their scriptures). As for sin, hell, commandments. Sure that is a burden. Hell is also possibly the greatest invention of the Abrahamic religions in terms of a blackmail tool. I wonder how powerful Christianity and Islam would be without the dogma of Hell. I suspect a lot less powerful. So yeah, it is not just comfort that religion gives, it can also manipulate people with the fear of Hell. But there are a lot of people who seek comfort in it. Many people do fear death, non-existence and it gives them comfort to believe they will never actually die. Those people will emphasize more the "God is merciful" and "God is forgiving" part of their religion.
|
|
|
Post by LindavG on Jan 10, 2018 0:28:18 GMT
LOL, those are a lot of strawman arguments. Atheism is racist, antisemitic and Islamophobic how? Atheists are many different people and as all groups of people I am sure there are racists among them. But I am also sure not more than among Christians, Muslims or any other group of people. Possibly rather less. I guess the charge of "antisemitism" and "Islamophobia" is twisting the criticism of religions - inlcuding Judaism or Islam - into that. As you said, it is a common fallacy from religious people (especially Muslims) to say that their religion being criticized (which is an ideology, not a race) equals to a form of racism (Islamophobia). It's a strategy to kill any criticism of that ideology in the bud, because they know that no one wants to be called a racist or a "phobic" of any kind and labelling people works in silencing any valid criticism. And the joke is on this poster because then he/she goes on to stereotype atheists as one kind of people: "a white male disgruntled ex-Christian who decided that if he can’t find joy in religion, then nobody else can". Exactly. That description of the typical atheist as white, male and ex-Christian manages to be racist, sexist and bigoted towards non-Christians turned atheist all at once. Someone tell Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Sarah Haider that they are not "the face of atheism" even though they're two of its most famous and influential proponents That last sentence was also very telling, "There’s a leftover missionary sensibility to “enlighten” people to atheism (...) that’s ultimately not unlike the dominance exerted through colonial Christianity." First of all, atheists have obtained nowhere near dominance anywhere in the world, except perhaps a few countries in Western Europe. Second, how predictable to single out Christianity as if Islam does not have its own sordid past of colonianism, forced conversions, slavery, etc. carrying on to this day in some places. But I guess that's islamophobic for me to point out? I don't understand where that idea of atheists as pessimistic or deprived of joy comes from either but it's very persistent. Atheists are really no different from anyone else except we believe in one god fewer than most people. We also enjoy eating good food, listening to music, being with friends, watching movies, all that fun stuff that requires no religion or God to believe in. I can still appreciate religious art or music even if I'm not religious myself. I can find pearls of wisdom in the Bible or the Quran even if I don't think they're divinely inspired. There are some very old churches (from the 12th to 17th century) in my town and I've been to all of them. In fact, I came across Richard Dawkins' twitter the other day and he apparently attended Mass in a cathedral in Lima on Christmas Day. This perception of atheists that we are all full of hate for everything to do with religion is just not true. But we have a right to speak our mind on why we identify as atheists without being smeared as negative or condescending. Comfort?? Not really. Anyone who has read parts of the bible can see there are loads of harsh, difficult or challenging ways they are asked to believe or live by. That's why it makes me laugh when people say, "ah, they want a fluffy fairy tale to believe in." Really? Have people read stuff about eternal separation, sin, hell, the commandments? It ain't no fluffy The Little Mermaid, that's for sure. Some people find comfort in being told exactly what to do, who to hate and who to obey. It's why authoritarianism continues to thrive all over the world.
|
|
|
Post by LindavG on Jan 10, 2018 2:25:04 GMT
I came across this NYT article the other day and I meant to share it with you guys. It's pretty scary how this radical version of Christianity is gaining more and more power and influence in the US. It is the literal equivalent of Islamism. If you think that's an exaggeration, please read the quotes in the article. The Museum of the Bible Is a Safe Space for Christian NationalistsBy KATHERINE STEWARTJAN. 6, 2018 LOOKING at it, you’d think that the Museum of the Bible was, in fact, a museum. But the organizers of Revolution 2017, a recent gathering at the museum featuring speakers who intend to “transform nations” by “igniting a holy reformation in every sphere of society,” know better. “We wholeheartedly believe the Museum of the Bible represents an ‘Ark of the Covenant’ for our nation, bearing witness to his goodness,” they proclaimed in their promotional material. Calling it an “ark” may seem premature. But the business about “transforming nations” is quite serious. The Museum of the Bible, which sits a few blocks southwest of the United States Capitol, is a continuation of politics by other means. A typical museum might invite visitors to explore the multiple meanings of the Bible and the complex history of its reception in different cultures over time. But this museum is not the place for that kind of inquiry; you’re here to celebrate. The exhibits will rock you — literally, when you take a simulated roller-coaster ride through selected biblical inscriptions on display in the nation’s capital — but they won’t shake your convictions. If you walk in thinking that the Bible has a single meaning, that the evidence of archaeology and history has served to confirm its truth, that it is the greatest force for good humanity has ever known and that it is the founding text of the American republic — well, then, you will leave with a smile on your face and a song in your heart. The museum is a safe space for Christian nationalists, and that is the key to understanding its political mission. The aim isn’t anything so crude as the immediate conversion of tourists to a particular variety of evangelical Christianity. Its subtler task is to embed a certain set of assumptions in the landscape of the capital. One individual who definitely gets it is Ralph Drollinger, the founder and president of Capitol Ministries and one of the most politically influential pastors in America. This fall, Mr. Drollinger held a training conference for some 80 international associates at the museum on the topic of “creating and sustaining discipleship ministries to political leaders.” Mr. Drollinger believes that social welfare programs “have no basis in Scripture,” that Christians in government have an obligation to hire only Christians and that women should not be allowed to teach grown men. He lays out his thinking in a 2013 book, “Rebuilding America: The Biblical Blueprint.” Mr. Drollinger was an early, passionate supporter of Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy. The “institution of the state” is “an avenger of wrath,” he explains, and its “God-given responsibility” is “to moralize a fallen world through the use of force.” Apparently, President Trump excels in these biblical criteria for leadership. Mr. Drollinger is dedicated to communicating those views in weekly Bible study groups. The participants in his groups, however, aren’t just anybody. They include Mike Pompeo, the director of the C.I.A.; Attorney General Jeff Sessions; Vice President Mike Pence; Betsy DeVos, the secretary of education; and other senior officials in the Trump administration. Mr. Drollinger seeks to institute similar if less-star-studded Bible study groups in all 50 state capitals. Mr. Drollinger claims to have planted 24 operations overseas and hopes “to create 200 ministries in 200 foreign federal capitals.” In 2015, his group was invited to “plant a discipleship Bible study ministry” in Belarus for the benefit of that nation’s political leaders. His wife, Danielle Drollinger, attended as a representative of the Museum of the Bible, with a promise that the museum’s Bible curriculum would soon be translated into Russian. This fall, the museum also hosted Revive Us 2, a “national family meeting” organized by Kirk Cameron, a television actor who has become a conservative Christian celebrity. The event was broadcast live from the museum to movie theaters around the country with the message that national unity can be achieved only through a religious “awakening” and allegiance to conservative Christianity. The intensely politicized religion that appears to be taking up residence at the Museum of the Bible isn’t there by accident. When Steve Green, the museum’s founder and the president of the Hobby Lobby crafts chain, formed the museum’s parent organization in 2010, he informed the I.R.S. that its purpose was “to bring to life the living word of God, to tell its compelling story of preservation, and to inspire confidence in the absolute authority and reliability of the Bible.” In 2012, the language was changed to say that the aim was simply “to invite people to engage with the Bible.” Mr. Green rose to fame by getting the conservative majority on the Supreme Court to confer on Hobby Lobby the right to withhold federally mandated reproductive health care coverage from its female employees. The Green family lent artifacts to the Creation Museum in Kentucky and offers support to a “religious literacy” program aimed at public school students detailing the consequences they face if they disobey God. Joining the Hobby Lobby stores on the donor wall that memorializes large gifts to the Museum of the Bible are a dozen-plus foundations that routinely back conservative Christian causes. There is also a lot of Amway money supporting the museum, including the Dick and Betsy DeVos Family Foundation and other foundations connected to the DeVos family. Given the theologico-political goals of its founders and patrons, it isn’t hard to see that the location of this museum was an act of symbolic and practical genius. If you’re going to build a Christian nation, this is where you start. That’s why Cindy Jacobs, a leading figure in the fast-growing world of charismatic Christianity, and a featured speaker at the Revolution 2017 event in December, described the museum as “God’s base camp.” There, in the auditorium of the museum, Ms. Jacobs offered this prediction: “The army of the heavens marches into Washington, D.C., and marches out of Washington, D.C.” Soon enough, “they go into North Korea.” Skeptics may question whether God is really storing his ammo on the corner of Fourth and D Streets SW. But the people doing his work at the Museum of the Bible don’t, and they’re pretty sure that the election of 2016 proved them right. According to Ms. Jacobs, Mr. Trump “will be seated and mantled with the power of God.” www.nytimes.com/2018/01/06/opinion/sunday/the-museum-of-the-bible-is-a-safe-space-for-christian-nationalists.html?_r=0
|
|
|
Post by LindavG on Jan 10, 2018 3:10:32 GMT
Truth is (something I think many people can forget) is that you can believe there is something more, like a higher power of some sort (like God) without subscribing to a particular religion. I am not a member of any church but I believe in God. I think the two issues can be separate. That is true, although often people who believe in God but not religion are still influenced by religion in their conceptualisation of God. Why is that surprising? The overwhelming majority of believers in the world subscribe to a particular religion so as an atheist it only makes sense to focus on that. Besides, it's hard to debate people who believe in a vague notion of a higher power without religion because their entire argument tends to rest on faith and gut feeling. Traditional religions provide concrete claims that can be proven or disproven so they are more suitable for discussion. Fair enough. I agree that there is a lot we don't know and will probably never know but for me the distinction between natural and supernatural just doesn't make sense. For me the natural world has no borders so I don't see how anything can be outside of it. Every new discovery will simply expand our knowledge of the natural world. Science is the tool we have at our disposal to study nature objectively but just because this tool is limited in what it can detect (because humans themselves are limited) doesn't mean that anything outside its observation is also outside of nature. Do you believe in a personal God that intervenes in human life or is God more of a deistic higher force for you?
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jan 10, 2018 4:58:40 GMT
Mr. Drollinger was an early, passionate supporter of Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy. The “institution of the state” is “an avenger of wrath,” he explains, and its “God-given responsibility” is “to moralize a fallen world through the use of force.” Apparently, President Trump excels in these biblical criteria for leadership. LMAO @ all the irony of this paragraph. Trump as a way “to moralize a fallen world". It is very funny how this not particularly religious guy (if religious at all), several times divorced, probably with lots ouf out of wedlock relationships as well, not to mention his corruption and other very "Biblical values" has become the hero of evangelical Christians. Don't they find that a tad bit embarrassing? As for the main topic of the article, I agree that much of evangelical Christianity is actually not that far off from Islamism in terms of extremist ideas - they would actually agree on a lot of things: gay rights, women's position in society, the church's need to be in political power, the shunning of many liberal values etc. Evangelical Christianity is less violent and the political power requirement cannot actually be supported from the Bible, while in Islam it is declared in its scriptures, so there are differences which push Islam even further to the extreme IMO, but the fundamentalist type Christianity isn't that far off indeed. And they would agree with Islamists on more points than with liberals.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jan 10, 2018 5:24:25 GMT
This is why I always pause to think when I hear people say that everybody should 'just believe whatever they want'. Of course I subscribe to that notion, in the sense that individuals have freedom of thought. Everybody should have the right to choose to believe what they want, in complete freedom, as long as they do not harm others. The latter is the problem. In practice, in many parts of the world, people are of course not given the liberty to choose because (usually) religion is forced upon them. From a young age, kids are indoctrinated to believe these unfounded tales and concepts. Entire societies are operating on the basis of religious texts. And many of the things you find in these texts are, as you rightfully point out, far-from-fluffy (to put it mildly). A lot of individuals are suffering as a result of this. Even in free societies, pressures within a family or the wider social group to believe or act in accordance with the faith are negatively affecting people. So when I hear people, usually from the comfort of a life free from religious pressures, say that everybody should be free to believe whatever they want, I agree, but also worry that the harmful facets of religion (in contrast with the comfort that it of course does give many) get ignored. This is a great point. In theory it sounds good that everyone should be allowed to believe in whatever they want and that's my approach in everyday life. I do not go around proselytizing people to atheism, I couldn't care less what they personally believe in if that makes them happy and if they likewise leave me alone with it. But the problem is that unproven religions have way too much power still in many societies and they do have a massive influence on even those people's lives who do not subscribe to that religion. So it is really not atheists who typically shove themselves down on other people's thoats despite of a couple of unpleasant atheists on the Internet or whatever your image of a millitant atheist is. I think this was also Richard Dawkins' reply to why he is such a "millitant atheist". Because, hell, as long as religious folks are in positions of power, shaping politics, society, education etc. based on religious dogma, it is not just a personal matter what you believe. It is not a personal matter when, for example, religious folks try to pass creationism as science and get it taught in science class as equal to the theory of evolution. This documentary is about such a case and it is a great example why it is not just a matter of what anyone personally believes. I wish it was, but that it is not is not usually on atheists, but on theists.
|
|
TonyR
The Legend Continues
Posts: 8,393
|
Post by TonyR on Jan 10, 2018 10:27:53 GMT
Re: Trump, it's scary how much you seem to be able to get away with in America as long as you're a 'believer'.
In fact I think theonly thing that would make Trump's supporters turn against him is if he denounced his faith.
It seems being a believer is more important that actually how you act in day to day life which is amazingly ironic ad I think religion was formed as a way of controlling people to act in a civilised & obediant way.
My worry that people feel they can do whatever they wany as long as they apologies after and use hackneyed phrases like 'I was being tested' or 'God is my true judge' etc.
|
|
|
Post by funksoldier on Jan 19, 2018 1:17:31 GMT
You know, I'm in a battle with myself right now. Thinking about if I should believe in a God or not. One thing is, I am part of the LBTQ, and if there's a God, what does he think of me? You know, all these religious people tell me, that I need help and that I disrespect God and that I'll go to hell. So I'm like: "If that is what God thinks about me, then he's not my God. The other thing is, believing that there is someone who one day gives you a reason for everything he/she/it puts you through can be comforting. Believing that there's a reason for it. But then there's the logic. You know, I don't believe that life was created by a God. I believe in science, it makes more sense to me. If God is real, why did he let the Jews kill Jesus? Why didn't he stop them? I believe Jesus was real, but he couldn't heal people. He was a random Dude. I don't believe the Marry was a virgin crap. But I respect everyone's believe, I think everyone who claims to be a decent human being should. As long as you give me the same amount of respect. But most religious people judge me, because I am part of the LBTQ, while I respect them I never insulted them or their God. But they are fast to give me shit and judge me. So it is kinda hard to be nice. But I try my best, try to be the better person, you know? If they go low, I go higher! The problem with some of them is, they tend to think that they actually got the truth. When it's their version of the truth, just to put others down, to have controll over them. Often religion is for men to opress women, gays, trans people etc, one time some men wrote those books and made their rules and told them it was God who spoke through them. I can't be a part of a religion who's preaching "love" while they opress gays, women, trans people etc at the very same time. You can't have double standards when it comes to that. You can't say "I am all for equality, BUT...." There are not buts, ifs or exceptions. But religions do exactly that. The most harmless religious people I met told me: "YOu're a sinner, but I accept you." Wow, thanks. See, there's my problem with them. I never said: "You're a religious maniac, but I accept you." I would never say that. But I got treated like that way too often. And I'm tired of it. So, if there is a God, I hope he can forgive me if I deny him, I hope he can forgive me that I am not sure if I should believe in him or not.
|
|