The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Atheistic and Christian faiths - a contest of delusions? > Comments

Atheistic and Christian faiths - a contest of delusions? : Comments

By Rowan Forster, published 15/3/2010

It's legitimate to ask what and where are the atheistic equivalents of Christian welfare agencies.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 34
  7. 35
  8. 36
  9. Page 37
  10. 38
  11. 39
  12. All
George

Thank you for explaining your religious background, I was not aware - I thought you more broad in your Christian affiliation than confined to Catholicism. Therefore, I ask, do you place the Christian religion as the one truth faith above all others?

Now: << My preference for the Catholic perspective is perhaps not unlike your preference for the English language (if I am right). >>

This is a very poor analogy (unless you wish to divert the debate that learning a religion is as instinctual for babies as is learning a language). I don't have a 'preference' for English it is the language of my birth culture - I did not become suspicious of the veracity of my language at age ten as I did with religious dogma. This comment of yours is more a 'bait and switch' tactic than a legitimate argument.

GrahamY

You have requested that atheists further research atheism? Or did I get your comment:

<< I checked out Wikipedia earlier today. For those really interested in what Atheism is it is a good starting point. >>

Wrong? And you thought religious people would better understand atheism with your link.



Again:

Atheism is nowhere near as complex as religion; no god, no life-after-death, no dogma and no belief. Another bait and switch tactic to Keep-the-Argument-Going.

I stopped believing in religious dogma and a supreme deity at age ten, therefore I no longer believed that Jesus was anything more than a man, the only changes to that epiphany at the end of childhood was that later I discounted Jesus as being a single person and more likely a composite of Jewish preachers. The study I undertook was of the bible itself, its contradictions, its paternalism, its patriarchal god and its confines to freedom of thought.

There is no required reading other than a reasoned and sceptical study of religion itself. Such as is applied to any claim made by humans.
Posted by Severin, Thursday, 25 March 2010 8:26:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Graham,

<<On the basis of the discussion here thus far I'd suggest that most Atheists think that Atheism is whatever they believe.>>

No, I believe I’ve defined it as a lack of belief, absence of belief and/or the disbelief in any religions or Gods.

I read the Wikipedia article you linked to and it very much supports exactly what I’ve been saying. From Agnosticism, to the implicit Atheism of a baby, to the explicit Atheism of someone who actively rejects the notion of a God. For further confirmation of my definitions , I recommend the Wikipedia article on Agnosticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism).

Either way though, it's important to remember that the definitions still don’t make Atheism a faith or a belief system, as it is Theists who are the ones making a claim, not Atheists. Even the “Explicit Atheists” are still only responding to those claims.

George,

One tactic that I’ve noticed some here on OLO employ when their arguments are weakening is to take the moral high-ground as a way of censoring others, or diverting attention from the good points that their opponents are making...

<<I personally did not live under Nazism, but I would never belittle the stories of its victims (well, those who survived), calling these experiences “means to obfuscate”, “cheap shots”...>>

Continued...
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 25 March 2010 11:58:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
...Continued

May I remind you of a little conversation we had a while back...

Me:
“But I’d prefer not to go down this road any further as I respect that you grew-up in a Stalinist country and don’t wish demean the unpleasantness you experienced.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3091#73309)

Your response:
“Thanks for the concern but - as hinted at in my post to Grim - it was not that bad: as a young person I actually enjoyed the living in “intellectual catacombs” of that officially pagan world. Whatever the “dangers”, in distinction to the first Christians, I did not have to fear being thrown to the lions.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3091#73329)

But now suddenly things are different, and in an attempt to divert attention from my arguments or bring the rationality of the thought processes behind them into question, I’m being painted as someone who is inconsiderate of the experiences of others.

<<...or by insisting that I knew better than they what drove their prosecutors or what was the source of their ordeal.>>

I didn’t say I knew better. In fact, I implied that you were the one who knew better and that’s why you were trying to obfuscate something quite simple.

I will call it as I see it and would never make such a remark unless I sincerely felt that it was relevant and necessary. But if there are certain things that we must ignore or can’t point out no matter how relevant (and despite previously being given the impression that the said topic was not a no-go-zone), then I may as well pack up and leave this thread now. And I would do just that if it weren’t for the fact that doing so would be giving into tactics that I believe are used by some to censor others.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 25 March 2010 11:59:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
GrahamY...

"The research you cite might just show TBC that if you believe you are following a religious path, then you will believe that your beliefs equate with God's commandments."

Graham, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make there.

Have you read the document? Or just not understood it?

Those who believe they are 'in contact' with their gods, do indeed believe that their own views are entirely consistent with their gods views.

They kid themselves because they need to.

This becomes a real problem when, say, within Christianity, there is conflict between denominations, and those who are so muddled headed they think they are 'just Christians', the sort that flock to invade our schools and pretend to be a 'chaplain'.
We see all sorts of damage done by these, frankly, foolish people.

It also causes trouble when Christians and Muslims, say, each follow their particular god, and end up blowing us all up, secure that they have each heard their god and been instructed to engage in terrorism, or a 'just war'.

We have also seen hundreds of years of Christians burning, killing, torturing, expelling Jews from England and all over Europe, as they followed the deepest thoughts of their gods, secure in their god-given knowledge that they are doing the exact will of their god.

This fed into the Holocaust, as we all know, but many Christians prefer to pretend their institutional fear and loathing of Jews was not drawn on by Hitler and others, and have instead constructed a 'devil' who led a nation of innocents astray in order to absolve their 'faith' from any crimes-against-humanity.

yet more later...
Posted by The Blue Cross, Thursday, 25 March 2010 2:27:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
George,

The post WWII communism in eastern europe was an occupation, and the same treatment was dealt out to students, artists, authors, etc and anyone that did not tow the party line.

This is a red herring. I was commenting on GY's assertion that Marxism was founded on athiesm, and considering the main implementation of the communist state was prior to WWII, this would be most relevant. The last couple of decades in occupied eastern europe is far less relevant.

My point is simply that if marxism was founded on athiesm, Lenin and Stalin would have been merciless in rooting out religion, where as they mostly just clipped its wings.

Being born in the 60s I have not lived in occupied eastern europe, but am old enough to have read reasonably extensively of different aspects. However, this is a side issue on a side issue.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 25 March 2010 2:57:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More to GrahamY from above....

"But you're completely off-topic. What about finding some research about what Atheists believe? On the basis of the discussion here thus far I'd suggest that most Atheists think that Atheism is whatever they believe" (GY post above).

Well, here I have already stated where I sit on atheism, but others can sit where ever they like.

It is only people like you that panic about 'the meaning of atheism', not me.

I am only an 'atheist' because of people like you, and many others here, demanding that everyone must have a 'belief'.

I am an atheist, courtesy of the need theists have for neat boxes to place the 'unchurched' into.

I did not go to that atheist convention, and had no desire to go there, finding it quite odd that people needed to self-identify in that manner.

That said, given the opportunity go to listen to Dawkins, Grayling, Wallace and many of the others on the list, I would go because I have read and listened to many of them, but only in a venue that did not require me to be identified as a 'particular' person.

Let's face it, theists of all shades feel they own the world already, and just the act of saying one does not believe is regarded as an evil heresy punishable with public scorn, bile and anonymous cards announcing some geek is praying for you poked into the family letterbox.

This fascination with what atheists believe is your illness, not mine.

I do not 'believe' in atheism at all, and I do not regard myself as an 'atheist'.

But I do see the 'evil', to borrow a theist concept, that many believers engage in, and the lies they tell, and the damage they do, and I find it utterly repulsive, and very anti-social, and very human-life and world threatening.

I know 'unbelievers' also behave poorly, and I frown equally on them.

But at least, as I regard these people as fairly worthless, I know they make no excuses for their inspiration, and in that sense, they are better people.
Posted by The Blue Cross, Thursday, 25 March 2010 4:04:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 34
  7. 35
  8. 36
  9. Page 37
  10. 38
  11. 39
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy