Suspending Reality

Atheism is a whole bunch of things.

But if you are saying that NO people who call themselves atheists have "beliefs"...I am going to suggest that you are wrong.

I didn't say ANY beliefs, just beliefs in the topic of the conversation.

There ARE people who call themselves atheists who "believe" there are no gods...or who "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one.

That would be "Strong Atheism" which makes what I also agree is an indefensible claim that "There is no God". That is a universal negative which is impossible to support or prove. So in that sense I will agree with you that some atheists have a "belief" qua belief.

That isn't the type of atheist I am so I tend to dismiss it. Perhaps I am blinded to it.

I suggest that the preponderance of people who use the descriptor "atheists" has oine of those beliefs.

Now you've met one who merely fails to believe. This is the form of Atheism that is much more defensible and rational.
 
I didn't say ANY beliefs, just beliefs in the topic of the conversation.



That would be "Strong Atheism" which makes what I also agree is an indefensible claim that "There is no God". That is a universal negative which is impossible to support or prove. So in that sense I will agree with you that some atheists have a "belief" qua belief.

That isn't the type of atheist I am so I tend to dismiss it. Perhaps I am blinded to it.



Now you've met one who merely fails to believe. This is the form of Atheism that is much more defensible and rational.

Okay...so you do not "believe." But you still use the descriptor "atheist."

Two questions, if I may:

One...am I correct that you use the descriptor "atheist" to describe yourself?

Two...you are saying that you do not "believe" there are no gods...and you also do not "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

Just want to clear that up before continuing with the conversation.
 
Okay...so you do not "believe." But you still use the descriptor "atheist."

Two questions, if I may:

One...am I correct that you use the descriptor "atheist" to describe yourself?

Two...you are saying that you do not "believe" there are no gods...and you also do not "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

Just want to clear that up before continuing with the conversation.

More guesses from you. I guess.
 
And you should know every one of them personally


So many huge churches get so big they don’t care about the individuals and prefer the structures survival more important than the people served


SMALL

or it becomes corrupted


Religion creates the PERFECT scaffolding for evil people to walk right in and take the power and subvert the whole intention

1000 times the rate of a decently constructed government structure


Faith

Just believe us were with the church


Con man heaven


They have to stop making huge churches


Or it will be constantly the destroying all the ideals their prophets and finding profits


Organized religions start wars and all hate each other and want each other dead


It’s the proof of just how corruptible large religious organizations are


Their ideals are fine with me for the most part


Their structures must seek money and power over guiding the faithful to good acts and peaceful lives

I'm not sure religion is the "perfect" scaffolding for evil to take control. Pope Francis, the Dalai Lama, Martin Luther King Jr. don't seem evil. There hasn't been a major war of religion in 500 years. It seems to me that colonialism, imperialism, fascism, capitalism, communism have been the major vehicles for evil to take root in the past two centuries.


I totally agree that there is significant financial and moral corruption in modern religious organizations.
 
Okay...so you do not "believe." But you still use the descriptor "atheist."

Correct.

Two...you are saying that you do not "believe" there are no gods

I fail to see sufficient evidence to believe in the existence of a god. This is not a "belief" per se (anymore than failing to believe in Bigfoot is an active belief).

...and you also do not "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

I fail to see sufficient evidence for the existence of any gods. Full stop.
 
I guess you are silly.

If we were playing poker...everyone at the table would realize you are on tilt.

Gonna put you on IGNORE for a few days. I have a conversation going that I find interesting...and you are just childishly trying to disrupt it.

See ya later.
 
Okay...so you do not "believe." But you still use the descriptor "atheist."

Two questions, if I may:

One...am I correct that you use the descriptor "atheist" to describe yourself?

Two...you are saying that you do not "believe" there are no gods...and you also do not "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

Just want to clear that up before continuing with the conversation.

The most militant of atheists believe the Gospels are a later fabrication that invented the character Jesus and the things he said

The most fundamentalist of holy rollers believe the bible is inerrant and factually true in all detail.

I've gotten both types screaming at me if I challenge their beliefs.
 
Some people can find complete purpose and meaning in the materialistic aspects of this Earth.

I think the majority of people in history, and even today, wanted to find a higher transcendent meaning beyond the ephemeral activities of physical life.

I think that's why religion or spirituality will always endure.

Lists of do's and dont's don't really give any explanation of why that is the right way to live. They don't explain why a certain set of a activities are categorical imperatives, rather that just voluntary lists of good social etiquette.

The Daodejing, the Analects, the Dhammapada, the Gospel of Luke do tend to give deeply profound explanations of the reasons for a certain kind of life.

My parents gave me a list of rules to live by. But a set of rules is not a method of understanding.

I learned a lot from my parents rules and example, I learned a lot from my physics and biology textbooks. But I never felt it neccesarily was a complete understanding of my existence and experience in life. That's why I started reading philosophical and religious literature about 20 years ago.

Life has no meaning


You imbue it with meaning


You create the meaning

You examine the world around you and analyze what would make this a better endeavor


Then you champion that and find ways to create that meaning in this life


I don’t think there is someone who built the ship


I don’t believe there is a captain at the wheel



I believe this is just the nature of what exists


What we have is what we have


Let’s make the best of it


I have always cared about others

From my tiniest memories


For me caring about others was just part of what exists



I’m proud as hell that is just a part of my being


If you pay attention most humans truly care about others


It’s so easy to spot

It’s so easy to tell its genuine


That is far more important than whatever an individual is indoctrinated into as a child


We are designed to care for others


That is what should guide us



Not the person who managed to wriggle their way into some power structure created by a “church” which has become more of a self perpetuating free ride for a few instead of a force of good



It’s just soooo corruptible compared to ANY other power structure


Just trust us

Faith


Believe and follow

You dont have understand

Just have faith


Asking people to just do what we say because you are to lowly to understand it all


We know

So do what we say



No thanks
 
The most militant of atheists believe the Gospels are a later fabrication that invented the character Jesus and the things he said

The most fundamentalist of holy rollers believe the bible is inerrant and factually true in all detail.

I've gotten both types screaming at me if I challenge their beliefs.

You mostly talk to yourself. There are no "militant atheists" on this forum. A pathetic strawman argument you are obsessed with.
 
Back
Top