Jump to content

What is your religion?


.Spock

Recommended Posts

'Pure-atheism' would be Anti-theism, the complete disbelief in a god. Atheism merely says there's no proof of one. It doesn't even attempt to explain what happened before the Big Bang, because there is no evidence to support any theories of pre-big bang existance.

Bad choice of words there. I mean atheism but a pure tacked on sounded better :3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Atheism isn't even a religion, its the lack-of. :I 

 

Uh, no.  Atheism is not believing in the existence of a deity.  Technically, you can be an atheist and still be religious, just like you can believe in a god(s) or God and not be religious at all, despite what modern definition may have you think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, no.  Atheism is not believing in the existence of a deity.  Technically, you can be an atheist and still be religious, just like you can believe in a god(s) or God and not be religious at all, despite what modern definition may have you think. 

Actually, that's being non-religious...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, no.  Atheism is not believing in the existence of a deity.  Technically, you can be an atheist and still be religious, just like you can believe in a god(s) or God and not be religious at all, despite what modern definition may have you think. 

 

How can you be religious and atheist? There are several religions that do not believe in a deity, so by your logic, they're automatically atheist. If someone is an atheist, they do not have a religion. Thus, atheism is not a religion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you be religious and atheist? There are several religions that do not believe in a deity, so by your logic, they're automatically atheist. If someone is an atheist, they do not have a religion. Thus, atheism is not a religion. 

a·the·ism  
/ˈāTHēˌizəm/
 
Noun
The theory or belief that God does not exist.
 
 
Atheism is not a religion, but it is not the lack of religion. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Pure-atheism' would be Anti-theism, the complete disbelief in a god. Atheism merely says there's no proof of one. It doesn't even attempt to explain what happened before the Big Bang, because there is no evidence to support any theories of pre-big bang existance.

 

Atheism is the outright denial of the existence of all deities, it is already "the complete disbelief in a god". Anti-theism is not "pure-atheism", but an opposition to theism. Agnosticism is what "merely says there's no proof of one". One can be simultaneously agnostic and anti-theistic by acknowledging the possibility of the existence of a deity or deities while being opposed to belief in them, this is what Christopher Hitchens meant by "I'm not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist". By the same coin, an atheist doesn't necessarily have to be anti-theistic, as they could deny the existence of any deity while not being opposed to belief in them.

 

tl;dr

Atheism is denial.

Theism is belief.

Anti-theism is an opposition to belief but not necessarily denial.

Agnosticism is neither belief nor denial but uncertainty.

 

Personally, I'm a theist. I used to be an agnostic but noticed that such a commitment to uncertainty is unhealthy because one has to have the faith to commit oneself to beliefs in everyday life. For how could I drink water everyday if I showed the same commitment to uncertainty as to whether or not it is poisoned as to whether or not a deity exists? Everyday I make this pragmatic leap of faith that my water is not poisoned so that I don't die of thirst, even though I am not absolutely sure that it is not poisoned. I feel it is more pragmatic to assume that a deity exists because from there I can derive greater meaning from my existence than if I lingered on my doubts or if I denied the existence of a deity outright (which is as much of an assumption as theism), and so that is why I am a theist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe in Kamina, because he believes in me.

You've always gotta bring down, haven't you? :D

 

Seriously though, Rakim, you made some great points. Although, I would look at your water analogy a different way. I view the idea of a god in the same way you'd view the idea of the poison in the water; incredibly unlikely, and so you have faith that it isn't there, not the other way around. I would say it's a bigger leap of faith to believe that your water has been poisoned than to believe it hasn't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've always gotta bring down, haven't you? :D

<3

but fr srs, I don't believe in any God. Not because I'm an atheist, but because I simply don't care. Actually, it's not even that I don't believe in a god, I just don't really care. I want to live my life without guidelines.

And hey, if hell really exists, I'll just take up Christianity on my death bed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was born and raised Roman Catholic, but the closest I can get to describing my current thoughts on the matter is ignosticism. Although I subscribe to Pascal's Wager and believe in a higher power on pure merit of practicality, I believe there's way too much assumption going on with what God is in order to properly offer belief. I'm not an apatheist, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's something that has always puzzled me about the concept of god. Religious people say that god is perfect, and that everything he creates is perfect. But if a concept was perfect, I mean truly perfect in every way, how would one be able to question it? How could you possibly try to disregard something that is flawless? Just something I had on my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was born and raised Roman Catholic, but the closest I can get to describing my current thoughts on the matter is ignosticism. Although I subscribe to Pascal's Wager and believe in a higher power on pure merit of practicality, I believe there's way too much assumption going on with what God is in order to properly offer belief. I'm not an apatheist, though.

not trying to start an argument, but you do realize Pascal's wager is seriously flawed? there's more than 1 religion, so if any of the ones you don't choose are right, isn't that gonna be worse for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had not properly replied to this topic, so I will say that I am apatheistic, unlike Rinne who first used the term here hours before I would have liked to.

 

It's a sincere disregard and uncaring for religion. The Wikipedia article states an uncaring look towards one's own religion and even more so for the religion of others, which makes my mother attempting to yell at me to be what she wants me to be actually irritate me, rather than compel me to join her.

 

One of the main reasons could be that it is a disgustingly separating entity for people on a grand scale. It is very sickening, really. And I mean literally. I, fortunately, am not susceptible to the bigotry of the mentally ill is what I would say had I been a hypocrite. The first sentence remains true, though.

 

I also like how, if one religion (or lack of) is right in the end, everybody else was deluded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was born and raised Roman Catholic, but the closest I can get to describing my current thoughts on the matter is ignosticism. Although I subscribe to Pascal's Wager and believe in a higher power on pure merit of practicality, I believe there's way too much assumption going on with what God is in order to properly offer belief. I'm not an apatheist, though.

Pascal's Wager scares me,so I'm trying to get decided before I need to lean on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's something that has always puzzled me about the concept of god. Religious people say that god is perfect, and that everything he creates is perfect. But if a concept was perfect, I mean truly perfect in every way, how would one be able to question it? How could you possibly try to disregard something that is flawless? Just something I had on my mind.

This is something I agree with.

The Old Testament alone contains stories with vengeful attitudes, murders of innocent people, punishment after having been granted free will, comments that diminish the imporance of women and people from certain ethnicities. How is that perfect at all? The Bible is supposed to be written by our perfect god. Despite that, it wasn't able to be timeless, even if some things might have been references to sayings and fables of the time, nowadays it needs of peole dedicating themselves to study it in order to decypher what everything means. Also, that must not be the only example, but it's the one I know of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a good form of gambling?

Probably, but then again, I have yet to hear of one.

 

This is something I agree with.

The Old Testament alone contains stories with vengeful attitudes, murders of innocent people, punishment after having been granted free will, comments that diminish the imporance of women and people from certain ethnicities. How is that perfect at all? The Bible is supposed to be written by our perfect god. Despite that, it wasn't able to be timeless, even if some things might have been references to sayings and fables of the time, nowadays it needs of peole dedicating themselves to study it in order to decypher what everything means. Also, that must not be the only example, but it's the one I know of.

the bible actually has around 41 different authors. none of them are god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...