Topic: Christianity is Poison - page 42. (Read 52639 times)
Man I am Christian and I am a Christ believer, I don't believe it is a poison because being a christian I was able to good things, the church taught us to be obedient and do good things to other regardless of religion.
There are no other religions "like" Christianity
1) There is no such thing as "Christianity"... all Christians believe different things...
Catholics don't believe in hell... Protestants do...
Catholics believe a different 10-commandments than protestants...
Mormons believe there are 4 levels of heaven... protestants and catholics believe there is only 1 level of heaven
Mormons believe Jesus was a space-alien from Kolob, who had physical sex with "the virgin" Mary
B) There are plenty of religions like Christianity... basically, all of them (except Hindu)... Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, Muslim... all basically the same thing with minor changes in dogma... all 4 of these cults believe the bible is a sacred religious text (they only interpret it differently)
Odd, I never realised Mormons are Christian.
Edit: I'm serious, I really did think they had a different god.
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm?lang=eng.
There are no other religions "like" Christianity
1) There is no such thing as "Christianity"... all Christians believe different things...
Catholics don't believe in hell... Protestants do...
Catholics believe a different 10-commandments than protestants...
Mormons believe there are 4 levels of heaven... protestants and catholics believe there is only 1 level of heaven
Mormons believe Jesus was a space-alien from Kolob, who had physical sex with "the virgin" Mary
B) There are plenty of religions like Christianity... basically, all of them (except Hindu)... Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, Muslim... all basically the same thing with minor changes in dogma... all 4 of these cults believe the bible is a sacred religious text (they only interpret it differently)
Odd, I never realised Mormons are Christian.
Edit: I'm serious, I really did think they had a different god.
There are no other religions "like" Christianity
1) There is no such thing as "Christianity"... all Christians believe different things...
Catholics don't believe in hell... Protestants do...
Catholics believe a different 10-commandments than protestants...
Mormons believe there are 4 levels of heaven... protestants and catholics believe there is only 1 level of heaven
Mormons believe Jesus was a space-alien from Kolob, who had physical sex with "the virgin" Mary
B) There are plenty of religions like Christianity... basically, all of them (except Hindu)... Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, Muslim... all basically the same thing with minor changes in dogma... all 4 of these cults believe the bible is a sacred religious text (they only interpret it differently)
There are no other religions "like" Christianity.
Christianity is the pure truth.
Other religions may be the poison that you are referring to
Christianity is the pure truth.
Other religions may be the poison that you are referring to
If you can honestly say that, you can also say the same for all religions.
I can honestly say with a free and open un corrupt mind.
Religious texts and believers are brainwashing people, can you not think for your self..
There are no other religions "like" Christianity.
Christianity is the pure truth.
Other religions may be the poison that you are referring to
Christianity is the pure truth.
Other religions may be the poison that you are referring to
You suggest that something is funny. It isn't you.
Correct, it's yourself.You would rather distort things than go and look at what is being said in the context that it is being said. This makes you to be deceptive.
Quite a few people on here have caught you with your pants down changing the definition of words around, your "context" cannot be taken seriously as that changes daily as well to suit the situation. And I'm apparently the deceptive one? Mmmmmm.....
In another post I invited you to come to God and to church.
In another post you correctly stated that church isn't needed to find God. So why encourage me to attend church? The conclusion is you must have other non-God related hidden agendas to get me inside that church, such as to disempower me by stealing my freethought, transferring that power to the hidden religious elite who then control my thinking.What you are really showing us is that you, in your deceptiveness, are not smart.
If I was deceptive, wouldn't that require me to be smart?If you were smart, you would be in church, there to rip other people off.
You can be quite certain the religious elite are not inside church ripping people off, they find suckers to do the dirty work for them without lifting a finger themselves.You don't appear to know much about how the world works.
By your deceptiveness that you attempt to use to rip people off in their thinking... right here in this forum.
The truth isn't ripping people off. Suppressing the truth is however.As it is, you are ignorant and unthinking enough that you can't even understand the things that you are talking about.
Meaningless desperate attack on me. Shall be ignored.Not everyone can be a great thinker.
Very true. However to be a great thinker requires freethought, the very thing that religion/church steals from you. Since once inside the dogma of the church, the church do the thinking for the members. The religious elite still allow freethought however, but it is strictly confined within the narrow guidelines of their set doctrine.
Thinking outside these guidelines is not allowed, mentally hobbled if you will. Doesn't set the stage for a great thinker.
What is the religion thing? Look at the facts. Then base the our religion on the things that the facts tell us.
Nice idea but in the real world it works along the lines of something like this:1) Read holy book and believe what it says.
2) Search for evidence and proof to back up No.1.
3) Find very little, if any.
3) Ignore plenty of facts and evidence that contradicts No.1.
4) Get angry with others that point out their obvious flawed logic.
5) Return to No.1.
And yet, I think religious fundamentalits have a different interpretation of their religion than the majority; they might be the vocal minority, giving a distorted definition of their beliefs.
I still agree with you though, found a graph visualising the idea.
Can you post the graph?
Here's the link though:
I've seen that before -- I think that it might be simplifying things a bit too much. "Not caring either way" should be an important axis there.
And yet, I think religious fundamentalits have a different interpretation of their religion than the majority; they might be the vocal minority, giving a distorted definition of their beliefs.
I still agree with you though, found a graph visualising the idea.
Can you post the graph?
Here's the link though:http://i.imgur.com/cXpmeB9.png
Just a heads-up
The 2016 "Reason Rally" is the weekend of June 4th
Speakers include:
Johnny Depp
Bill Nye (the science guy)
Penn Jillette
James Randi
Lawrence Krauss
Carolyn Porco (NASA)
Margaret Cho
(and many more) http://reasonrally.org/speakers/
http://reasonrally.org/schedule/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason_Rally
(true story... Jesus murders an innocent fig tree)
The 2016 "Reason Rally" is the weekend of June 4th
Speakers include:
Johnny Depp
Bill Nye (the science guy)
Penn Jillette
James Randi
Lawrence Krauss
Carolyn Porco (NASA)
Margaret Cho
(and many more) http://reasonrally.org/speakers/
http://reasonrally.org/schedule/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason_Rally
(true story... Jesus murders an innocent fig tree)
Ah. Concealed abuse, again. I'd thought you'd changed but it seems not.
No concealed abuse whatsoever. Atheists constantly abuse themselves by stupidly proclaiming their atheism, completely unconcealed, especially when they do it as adamantly as they do. They should be thanking me that I am showing them how stupid they are acting and look, so that they can either be quiet about it, or change to look at and accept the truth. But no. All they can do is claim that they are being abused. And then they go further to abuse themselves and cry about it some more.
If you atheists can't seem to get out of your stupid cycle, why don't you seek help? Are you that far gone that you can't even do that?
Not even bothering about concealing the abuse now, are you?
Then ask those same atheists if they are telling the truth or only dreaming.
Why? How does dreaming come in to the question of what someone thinks?
I know religious prophets have dreams of gods, do you mean the same thing happens here?
The idea isn't literal dreaming. The idea is a forced day dreaming, to make it seem reality.
Science talks about cause and effect as though it is the basis for everything. A scientist is great only after he has mastered seeking the causes for any effects.
Entropy suggests that complexity is waning. And, entropy seems to be universal as far as we can tell, even though there are flares of complexity now and again... flares which are culminations of combining of that which is even more complex.
If God happens to NOT be proven by this, God is highly suggested. So, what kind of day dreaming is it that atheists use to get them selves to so adamantly resist any idea that God exists, while at the same time so emphatically accept the sciences of cause and effect, complex universe, and universal complexity.
Everyone lies to himself one way or another. What strength of mind these atheists must have to lie to themselves in such a great way as to accept science, but resist the greatest thing science is showing them!
Ah. Concealed abuse, again. I'd thought you'd changed but it seems not.
No concealed abuse whatsoever. Atheists constantly abuse themselves by stupidly proclaiming their atheism, completely unconcealed, especially when they do it as adamantly as they do. They should be thanking me that I am showing them how stupid they are acting and look, so that they can either be quiet about it, or change to look at and accept the truth. But no. All they can do is claim that they are being abused. And then they go further to abuse themselves and cry about it some more.
If you atheists can't seem to get out of your stupid cycle, why don't you seek help? Are you that far gone that you can't even do that?
Then ask those same atheists if they are telling the truth or only dreaming.
Why? How does dreaming come in to the question of what someone thinks?
I know religious prophets have dreams of gods, do you mean the same thing happens here?
The idea isn't literal dreaming. The idea is a forced day dreaming, to make it seem reality.
Science talks about cause and effect as though it is the basis for everything. A scientist is great only after he has mastered seeking the causes for any effects.
Entropy suggests that complexity is waning. And, entropy seems to be universal as far as we can tell, even though there are flares of complexity now and again... flares which are culminations of combining of that which is even more complex.
If God happens to NOT be proven by this, God is highly suggested. So, what kind of day dreaming is it that atheists use to get them selves to so adamantly resist any idea that God exists, while at the same time so emphatically accept the sciences of cause and effect, complex universe, and universal complexity.
Everyone lies to himself one way or another. What strength of mind these atheists must have to lie to themselves in such a great way as to accept science, but resist the greatest thing science is showing them!
[/quote]
Ah. Concealed abuse, again. I'd thought you'd changed but it seems not.
Religion is meant for the 'weak', and yet, atheist are equally as close-minded as religious people. Saying something unknown doesn't exist for sure is just as dumb as saying it does without any foundation. People who denied the existence of an american continent were equally as close-minded as those who believed the other extreme.
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Atheism does not mean a person knows for certain there is no God
Atheism is simply a rejection of any (or all) specific Gods...
Christians say their God exists... I don't believe them... I'm an Atheist... same goes for Hindu, Muslim, etc... I don't believe any of them
To compare it to a courtroom... Atheism would be finding the defense, "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" (you have not proven God exists)... which is different from "innocent" (God does not exist)
Atheism is a statement about belief, and Agnostic is a statement about knowledge... the two are not mutually exclusive... (you can be an Agnostic Atheist, or a Gnostic Atheist... just like you can be a Gnostic or Agnostic Christian)
Also, nobody knows for certain (everyone is an agnostic)... anyone who claims to know for certain is a liar or a fool
You might be right though
.At least I can see your point
Rather than using a wiki, it's best to ask atheists what they believe:
https://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
Quote
WHAT IS ATHEISM?
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
Then ask those same atheists if they are telling the truth or only dreaming.
Why? How does dreaming come in to the question of what someone thinks?
I know religious prophets have dreams of gods, do you mean the same thing happens here?
The idea isn't literal dreaming. The idea is a forced day dreaming, to make it seem reality.
Science talks about cause and effect as though it is the basis for everything. A scientist is great only after he has mastered seeking the causes for any effects.
Entropy suggests that complexity is waning. And, entropy seems to be universal as far as we can tell, even though there are flares of complexity now and again... flares which are culminations of combining of that which is even more complex.
If God happens to NOT be proven by this, God is highly suggested. So, what kind of day dreaming is it that atheists use to get them selves to so adamantly resist any idea that God exists, while at the same time so emphatically accept the sciences of cause and effect, complex universe, and universal complexity.
Everyone lies to himself one way or another. What strength of mind these atheists must have to lie to themselves in such a great way as to accept science, but resist the greatest thing science is showing them!
And yet, I think religious fundamentalits have a different interpretation of their religion than the majority; they might be the vocal minority, giving a distorted definition of their beliefs.
I still agree with you though, found a graph visualising the idea.
Can you post the graph?
Religion is meant for the 'weak', and yet, atheist are equally as close-minded as religious people. Saying something unknown doesn't exist for sure is just as dumb as saying it does without any foundation. People who denied the existence of an american continent were equally as close-minded as those who believed the other extreme.
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Atheism does not mean a person knows for certain there is no God
Atheism is simply a rejection of any (or all) specific Gods...
Christians say their God exists... I don't believe them... I'm an Atheist... same goes for Hindu, Muslim, etc... I don't believe any of them
To compare it to a courtroom... Atheism would be finding the defense, "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" (you have not proven God exists)... which is different from "innocent" (God does not exist)
Atheism is a statement about belief, and Agnostic is a statement about knowledge... the two are not mutually exclusive... (you can be an Agnostic Atheist, or a Gnostic Atheist... just like you can be a Gnostic or Agnostic Christian)
Also, nobody knows for certain (everyone is an agnostic)... anyone who claims to know for certain is a liar or a fool
You might be right though
.At least I can see your point
Rather than using a wiki, it's best to ask atheists what they believe:
https://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
Quote
WHAT IS ATHEISM?
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
Then ask those same atheists if they are telling the truth or only dreaming.
Why? How does dreaming come in to the question of what someone thinks?
I know religious prophets have dreams of gods, do you mean the same thing happens here?
Religion is meant for the 'weak', and yet, atheist are equally as close-minded as religious people. Saying something unknown doesn't exist for sure is just as dumb as saying it does without any foundation. People who denied the existence of an american continent were equally as close-minded as those who believed the other extreme.
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Atheism does not mean a person knows for certain there is no God
Atheism is simply a rejection of any (or all) specific Gods...
Christians say their God exists... I don't believe them... I'm an Atheist... same goes for Hindu, Muslim, etc... I don't believe any of them
To compare it to a courtroom... Atheism would be finding the defense, "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" (you have not proven God exists)... which is different from "innocent" (God does not exist)
Atheism is a statement about belief, and Agnostic is a statement about knowledge... the two are not mutually exclusive... (you can be an Agnostic Atheist, or a Gnostic Atheist... just like you can be a Gnostic or Agnostic Christian)
Also, nobody knows for certain (everyone is an agnostic)... anyone who claims to know for certain is a liar or a fool
You might be right though
.At least I can see your point
Rather than using a wiki, it's best to ask atheists what they believe:
https://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
Quote
WHAT IS ATHEISM?
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
And yet, I think religious fundamentalits have a different interpretation of their religion than the majority; they might be the vocal minority, giving a distorted definition of their beliefs.
I still agree with you though, found a graph visualising the idea.
Religion is meant for the 'weak', and yet, atheist are equally as close-minded as religious people. Saying something unknown doesn't exist for sure is just as dumb as saying it does without any foundation. People who denied the existence of an american continent were equally as close-minded as those who believed the other extreme.
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Atheism does not mean a person knows for certain there is no God
Atheism is simply a rejection of any (or all) specific Gods...
Christians say their God exists... I don't believe them... I'm an Atheist... same goes for Hindu, Muslim, etc... I don't believe any of them
To compare it to a courtroom... Atheism would be finding the defense, "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" (you have not proven God exists)... which is different from "innocent" (God does not exist)
Atheism is a statement about belief, and Agnostic is a statement about knowledge... the two are not mutually exclusive... (you can be an Agnostic Atheist, or a Gnostic Atheist... just like you can be a Gnostic or Agnostic Christian)
Also, nobody knows for certain (everyone is an agnostic)... anyone who claims to know for certain is a liar or a fool
You might be right though
.At least I can see your point
Rather than using a wiki, it's best to ask atheists what they believe:
https://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
Quote
WHAT IS ATHEISM?
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
Then ask those same atheists if they are telling the truth or only dreaming.
Religion is meant for the 'weak', and yet, atheist are equally as close-minded as religious people. Saying something unknown doesn't exist for sure is just as dumb as saying it does without any foundation. People who denied the existence of an american continent were equally as close-minded as those who believed the other extreme.
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Atheism does not mean a person knows for certain there is no God
Atheism is simply a rejection of any (or all) specific Gods...
Christians say their God exists... I don't believe them... I'm an Atheist... same goes for Hindu, Muslim, etc... I don't believe any of them
To compare it to a courtroom... Atheism would be finding the defense, "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" (you have not proven God exists)... which is different from "innocent" (God does not exist)
Atheism is a statement about belief, and Agnostic is a statement about knowledge... the two are not mutually exclusive... (you can be an Agnostic Atheist, or a Gnostic Atheist... just like you can be a Gnostic or Agnostic Christian)
Also, nobody knows for certain (everyone is an agnostic)... anyone who claims to know for certain is a liar or a fool
You might be right though
.At least I can see your point
http://i.imgur.com/cXpmeB9.png
Religion is meant for the 'weak', and yet, atheist are equally as close-minded as religious people. Saying something unknown doesn't exist for sure is just as dumb as saying it does without any foundation. People who denied the existence of an american continent were equally as close-minded as those who believed the other extreme.
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Agnosticism allows to say 'I don't know' in order to build a bi-optional foundation. Let's find out without any bias, and let faith help those who need it.
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAtjs-JAtE
Atheism does not mean a person knows for certain there is no God
Atheism is simply a rejection of any (or all) specific Gods...
Christians say their God exists... I don't believe them... I'm an Atheist... same goes for Hindu, Muslim, etc... I don't believe any of them
To compare it to a courtroom... Atheism would be finding the defense, "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" (you have not proven God exists)... which is different from "innocent" (God does not exist)
Atheism is a statement about belief, and Agnostic is a statement about knowledge... the two are not mutually exclusive... (you can be an Agnostic Atheist, or a Gnostic Atheist... just like you can be a Gnostic or Agnostic Christian)
Also, nobody knows for certain (everyone is an agnostic)... anyone who claims to know for certain is a liar or a fool
You might be right though
.At least I can see your point
Rather than using a wiki, it's best to ask atheists what they believe:
https://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
Quote
WHAT IS ATHEISM?
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
No one asks this question enough.
The reason no one asks this question a lot is because most people have preconceived ideas and notions about what an Atheist is and is not. Where these preconceived ideas come from varies, but they tend to evolve from theistic influences or other sources.
Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves.
Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion. While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. Two commonly used retorts to the nonsense that atheism is a religion are: 1) If atheism is a religion then bald is a hair color, and 2) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease. A new one introduced in 2012 by Bill Maher is, "If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position."
The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Some of the best debates we have ever had have been with fellow atheists. This is because atheists do not have a common belief system, sacred scripture or atheist Pope. This means atheists often disagree on many issues and ideas. Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. We are as unique as our fingerprints.
Jump to: