I'm...LOVING IT

I mean...theres still not that many of us...and I wish more women were on game and open to at least changing their minds without turning them completely off.

But I truly have to thank the internet and web-forums for changing the ability for atheists to connect and express themselves.

i'm not atheist, but i'm glad that we're starting to show some "religious diversity" lol. Im tired of people assuming I'm Christian.

Not an atheist but definitely not a part of the big three.

To see the wisdom/valor displayed by these youngins after throwing away those chains is astonishing



glad i get to see it too

maybe you did this on purpose but it sounds like a religion even though I know it isn't.

"All praises due"

A fable taught from birth.

The courage it takes for a black youth to embrace this truth are some of the most heroic stories ive ever heard

In the church you are taught fear. Thats the difference

it doesn't have anything to do with my point but whatever...

the same words/phrasing being used in the OP are also used in church and I find it hilarious.

your belief of whatever dims the wit you think you have. Don't expect you to see that


or engage in anything thought worthy for that matter


yeah, this is defensive lol

Zaire is a Recovering Catholic. The reason he doesn't recognize how churchy that sounded is because that's more so Black Baptist type language, which he wouldn't be familiar with. Basically, he's not aware of what you're referring to.

Edited to say that casting off chains stuff is classic Black church talk.

but how could you even remotely fathom that, you believe the same story a child does.


I tell you what, you sure know more about my dick than your own judgment, but continue to follow my story


and your beats sucked too lol

then. Your Black Baptist culture is lacking like a mugg.

is it because you think atheists are stupid and should believe in your sky daddy & poison apples?



or are you just a naive coward that cannot face the fact that your faith is bullshit, and you want somebody else to say it for you?



a sunday school joke fam, lol thats all you can come up with

Thanks for that - I was wrong about you, you're actually good for something.

Come on man, keep these coming, I need more.

I actually understand why many people are atheist or why they're against Religion, unlike many Christians. But it doesn't affect me much, and 99.8% of the Black atheists I know are online....mainly y'all here, and a few on Twitter. And even less on Facebook.

I've been on the internet about as long as I've been conscious. And I am agnostic, not atheist, but do you feel the dissemination of options has anything to do with it, particularly in black communities?


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

i'm not a religious person at all....not an atheist either....
but I don't understand why such a thing brings you such joy...


.

yes, people can ride for atheism with the same tenacity of religion, but one requires faith, the other requires reason


the most common defence against atheism is that atheism is a religion itself, but there is no protocol, divine figure, or tradition to praise, besides proof.


The irony is is that everyone is born an atheist, and even folks that believe in religious doctrine is an atheist to the gods they dont believe/serve. But, like most truths, this concept rarely gets the attention it deserves


But yeah, atheism as a religion doesnt make sense at all

then that's pretty much the exit ramp to religion it seems....


.

So thats not the goal.

Its something that you have to understand on a fundamental level and no one can do this but that person.


Ridicule is not recruitment

this is really draining....

not trying to argue with you fam....

yall just want to point out a stupid point

that yall see the non-believers equally dickheadish as believers

but yall are doing it wrong...

it's similar to conversion but it's not conversion...

that's really the end of it but yall are so amused by the similarties you'd rather troll about it than see the nuanced difference

.

more along the lines of....being a Black Atheist in 2015 is easier now that more Black folks are either stepping forward about it and/or switching over to that mindset.....

It was early when I responded.....being awake longer has brought a little more clarity though...
.

like the idea of being black and atheist is less foreign so when introduced ppl are less likely to clutch pearls.

okay

>but I don't understand why such a thing brings you such
>joy...
>
>
>.

does it really matter?

wonder what bin's doing?
http://i.imgur.com/phECCMp.jpg

I hope not. I'm agnostic, so I guess I don't fit the atheist term to a T, but attaching the racial connotation feels a bit like pandering to me. I guess I see what you're saying in terms of feeling a kinship with other folks who happen to be black that are non-believers, but the term itself feels wrong.

I wish we had more black female atheists...I get tired of those awkward convos.

but me personally-- not happy about it.

why would i celebrate it?

i don't need the strength of others to know what i know.

And if so, what does being an Atheist "do" for you? What's the selling point?

Looking at it in its most cynical terms, if there is a red and blue pill, why would you want someone to take the red pill?


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're r

One's religion or belief system is a personal choice, so I don't care what others choose to believe, as long as they don't try to push their beliefs on me. However, I would like it if folks don't react as if I am disparaging on their chosen belief system when I let them know I am a non-believer.

making it a conversation piece or trying to judge someone who feels differently.

But it would be nice if those with beliefs would be more respectful of my lack of belief. And not ignorantly paint me as souless and without rudder or even evil.

When I see that yearly 'WAR on CHRISTMAS' bull on Facebook every year, I just want to shake some of my friends, because I'm very respectful of them and even go that extra mile of bowing my head before a meal with them at a restaurant n' shit. When they're apply for a job or whatever and ask folks to pray for them, I don't get snarky and go in (so what about the prayers of that other job applicant?), I just wish them well, and go on with my business.

I'm not open with my Atheism, cuz I don't want the drama. But if people ask I will tell them.

what they ultimately decide to believe I don't care about.

but just going along because seems stupid to me

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

i'm not an atheist but i enjoy talking to them. perhaps more-so than talking to religious folks...

Ever notice how secular the Internet tends to be?

reddit, Twitter etc stay going in on organized religion

Its the farthest from its natural or most potent place.

SCIENCE!

I've always found the connection with christianity very perplexing just due to its the genesis within the black community - i.e. forced via slavery - you would think there would have been a visceral backlash to it at SOME point after abolition

>I've always found the connection with christianity very
>perplexing just due to its the genesis within the black
>community - i.e. forced via slavery - you would think there
>would have been a visceral backlash to it at SOME point after
>abolition


To be fair, the black church did serve a purpose in the civil rights era in terms of functioning as a way for folks to organize. I'm not a Christian and I'm don't go to church myself, but they do serve a purpose.

but i still have trouble squaring that with the fact that pretty much any black christian in america - you're only christian because at some point in your ancestry a slave master said to your forefather, "you're a christian now or you hang" - simple as that

but i guess thats really no different (much more despicable, but functionally no different) than the way that religion is simply a geographic anomaly to begin with. you can believe in christianity to the depths of your soul, but the fact is that if you happened to be born in india, you'd probably be hindu. if you happened to be born in the middle east, you'd probably be muslim. Etc.

Black churches we're buildings where people could congregate...this has nothing to do with god existing

>Black churches we're buildings where people could
>congregate...this has nothing to do with god existing

I'm agnostic, so arguing for the existence of God would be ass backwards for me. I was just saying Christianity itself served a positive influence for black folks in this country in the civil right era. I personally don't think it was God's hand or anything to that extent, but it did serve as a tool to help folks organize in a social sense.

nothing new under the sun





Original Post:

We believe in nothing, Lebowski. Nothing. And tomorrow we come back and we cut off your Chonson.

Popular religions.

Niggas might as well be white and racist.

You lose your power when you deny the greater portion of your origin.

One of the reasons black folk are in trouble now, honoring mythical ancestors of everyone else and ignoring their own.

>One of the reasons black folk are in trouble now, honoring
>mythical ancestors of everyone else and ignoring their own.

Theist means one who believes in a transcendent god but denies revelation.

I don't believe I know from experience that my ancestors have a direct effect on who I am and what I have.

This can be proven by the limited scope that is "white/western" science.

So it is not a belief.

"If you got a GOD, make sure it's in your image"
paraphrasing Garvey

You on point with this reply

I'm kind of over black people praying for deliverance to the god of their oppressors. There's just something off about subscribing to a cosmology that is void of you culturally. I just really want black people as a whole to start questioning shit, whatever answer people come to individually is cool with me as long as they're not trying to push it on me.

Real courage from these children, who love their parents, but who are not afraid of truth.

Truth that is within the grasp of young people, and they embrace it.


And you take a jab at gays, as if they arent standing up in the face of cowardice?

>Real courage from these children, who love their parents, but
>who are not afraid of truth.
>
>Truth that is within the grasp of young people, and they
>embrace it.
>
>
>And you take a jab at gays, as if they arent standing up in
>the face of cowardice?

Not a jab, I've heard people on here say they're not out to their families

niggas prolly get slapped with the king j version

after going to church for the first time in years recently (with no plans of a repeat I should add, this was for family and appearances) I was reminded that the church is essentially ground zero for black culture in a lot of ways

the communal spirit is not exclusive to a doctrine


and black folks are very creative in this country lol


perhaps seeing the value in reality could be a binding force? We have a long way to go, but the rise in this rebellion is showing a lot of new promise.

but let me chew your food for you;


if the black church finally realized that white jesus is not real, nor his zombie counterpart, do you really think the congregation would just stop being so communal?


Yes, every one would go home & become sadistic murderers makin videos for pornhub


We rode on dinosaurs 6,000 years ago too, like the flintstones

Calling yourself an Atheist is akin to calling yourself a Christian. You have just changed how you interpret a few variables but they are all still there.

Best not to label yourself as anything at all.

There are lots of interesting articles about the nature of Atheism as it's own religion.

>Calling yourself an Atheist is akin to calling yourself a
>Christian. You have just changed how you interpret a few
>variables but they are all still there.
>
>Best not to label yourself as anything at all.
>
>There are lots of interesting articles about the nature of
>Atheism as it's own religion.

care to expound on this?

God as a variable is pertinent to being an "Atheist"

What might an Atheist say to you:

"I don't believe in God".

"God" is still part of the equation, you call him into being by asserting him as an entity, and then identify yourself as someone that does not believe in him.

Try to be an "Atheist" without God. You can't.

A good diagram of what I am talking about would be a triangle with "God" as the apex, the believer and non believer on the two opposing ends of the base. Both are reliant and dependent on the idea of God.

Keep in mind, this only works if you actually call yourself an "Atheist". People in my circles used to identify themselves as Atheist until they learned the term has become a label that carries a lot of weight with it. If you are going to take a label on, you should realize that there are thousands of people who share it. That can be dangerous as there are many asshole Atheist's out there that put as much time into promoting non belief as Christians put into pro-belief. They are two sides of the same coin and I always chuckle at people who think they stand on higher ground by calling themselves Atheists.

The safest bet is to say "I don't know" or "I don't believe in anything." You can't label someone who says that and it free's them from the burden of having to prove their point, which ultimately only leads to conflict anyway. A true non believer will not discuss the topic under the guise of a banner other's use in an evangelical or oppressive way.

>>Calling yourself an Atheist is akin to calling yourself a
>>Christian. You have just changed how you interpret a few
>>variables but they are all still there.
>>
>>Best not to label yourself as anything at all.
>>
>>There are lots of interesting articles about the nature of
>>Atheism as it's own religion.
>
>care to expound on this?

>God as a variable is pertinent to being an "Atheist"
>
>What might an Atheist say to you:
>
>"I don't believe in God".
>
>"God" is still part of the equation, you call him into being
>by asserting him as an entity, and then identify yourself as
>someone that does not believe in him.
>
>Try to be an "Atheist" without God. You can't.
>
>A good diagram of what I am talking about would be a triangle
>with "God" as the apex, the believer and non believer on the
>two opposing ends of the base. Both are reliant and dependent
>on the idea of God.

ok. but why does "God" have to be apart of the equation? as an atheist, there's plenty of other gods i don't believe in as well. such as zeus, vishnu, thor, allah etc.

>Keep in mind, this only works if you actually call yourself an
>"Atheist". People in my circles used to identify themselves as
>Atheist until they learned the term has become a label that
>carries a lot of weight with it. If you are going to take a
>label on, you should realize that there are thousands of
>people who share it. That can be dangerous as there are many
>asshole Atheist's out there that put as much time into
>promoting non belief as Christians put into pro-belief. They
>are two sides of the same coin and I always chuckle at people
>who think they stand on higher ground by calling themselves
>Atheists.

but atheist IS the correct term. a theist is somebody that believes in a god or a creator. the prefix 'a' is added to determine a non-believer. no "God" needs to be added to any "equation." atheism is the belief that nothing exists. or, more correctly, it's the belief that we haven't as yet found anything that resembles a god.


>
>The safest bet is to say "I don't know" or "I don't believe in
>anything." You can't label someone who says that and it free's
>them from the burden of having to prove their point, which
>ultimately only leads to conflict anyway. A true non believer
>will not discuss the topic under the guise of a banner other's
>use in an evangelical or oppressive way.
>

nah. the "safest bet" is to say, "Up to now, there has been no evidence to suggest that there is, has been, or ever will be a god." much like it's the safest bet to assume that there has never been a fire-shitting, pink elephant.

i appreciate that you may have religious beliefs, but you can't try and lump atheism into the same pile of them.

>
>ok. but why does "God" have to be apart of the equation? as an
>atheist, there's plenty of other gods i don't believe in as
>well. such as zeus, vishnu, thor, allah etc.



It's part of the equation because it's dependent on it.

By sharing your list you gave names to a god, however, Zeus and Thor were not God's in the typical sense, they were allegorical symbols for the super physical forces of the universe. They were not considered as living and breathing entities. When the original meanings were lost people began to accept them as personalities.

Vishnu was also an allegorical symbol, but Allah is considered to be a breathing, living, thinking god. You can name "god" whatever you like, the point is, by calling yourself an Atheist, any god you choose is part of the equation because the belief is dependent on them.


>but atheist IS the correct term. a theist is somebody that
>believes in a god or a creator. the prefix 'a' is added to
>determine a non-believer. no "God" needs to be added to any
>"equation." atheism is the belief that nothing exists. or,
>more correctly, it's the belief that we haven't as yet found
>anything that resembles a god.

I just think its funny that you can't be an Atheist without god, that's all. The term Atheist is reliant and dependent on the idea of god.


>
>nah. the "safest bet" is to say, "Up to now, there has been no
>evidence to suggest that there is, has been, or ever will be
>a god." much like it's the safest bet to assume that there has
>never been a fire-shitting, pink elephant.

The correct thing to say is, up to now, there has been no evidence FOR or AGAINST the existence of god. You cannot prove he exists and you cannot prove he doesn't. They are two sides of the same coin, which side you choose is up to you, you have just as much evidence as the other guy.


>
>i appreciate that you may have religious beliefs, but you
>can't try and lump atheism into the same pile of them.

I don't have any religious beliefs. I am not religious, and I'm not sure why you interpreted that. I just think its funny that Atheism cannot exist without god, that's all.

no. all those historic gods i listed were once deemed as living, breathing entities. shit, some people may believe that thor is living and breathing now, i don't know, nor care. it isn't relevant anyway.

you're getting a bit mixed up with your terms. atheism isn't the non-belief of "God." it's the non-belief of ANY god or creator or magical spirit in the sky that governs the universe.

this non-belief is based on the fact that there has been no evidence to suggest that there is a god. yes, there has been no evidence to suggest that there ISN'T a god either, but that's also pretty irrelevant, because what would constitute evidence to dispute god's existence? what would constitute evidence to dispute a a pink, fire-shitting elephant's existence? how do you KNOW it doesn't exist? prove it DOESN'T exist. to judge whether something exists, it's best to work with hard, objective, tangible evidence. this is why in science you seek only to 'prove' something wrong by setting up a working, testable hypothesis with appropriate variables. "God" is not a testable hypothesis as it cannot be proved right or wrong.

and the reason i implied you were religious is because the stuff you're saying is the 'argument' i hear from religious people when they try to compare atheism and theism. how atheism is similar to religion. it isn't, at all.

maybe you're agnostic, and that's cool. but you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. atheism is not dependent on what anybody deems to be a god.

>no. all those historic gods i listed were once deemed as
>living, breathing entities. shit, some people may believe
>that thor is living and breathing now, i don't know, nor care.
>it isn't relevant anyway.

NO, that is incorrect. I have studied Mythology and Theology in great depth and I assure you that ancient gods were not thought of as real. They were symbols. Why do you think there is a god for every aspect of nature or human experience? I can provide you with a full history on where religious symbolism came from if you are interested.

>
>you're getting a bit mixed up with your terms. atheism isn't
>the non-belief of "God." it's the non-belief of ANY god or
>creator or magical spirit in the sky that governs the
>universe.
>

Semantics. The basic diagram remains.

"God" or spiritual being at the apex of the triangle, belief and non belief at the opposing ends of the base.

>this non-belief is based on the fact that there has been no
>evidence to suggest that there is a god. yes, there has been
>no evidence to suggest that there ISN'T a god either, but
>that's also pretty irrelevant, because what would constitute
>evidence to dispute god's existence? what would constitute
>evidence to dispute a a pink, fire-shitting elephant's
>existence? how do you KNOW it doesn't exist? prove it DOESN'T
>exist. to judge whether something exists, it's best to work
>with hard, objective, tangible evidence. this is why in
>science you seek only to 'prove' something wrong by setting up
>a working, testable hypothesis with appropriate variables.
>"God" is not a testable hypothesis as it cannot be proved
>right or wrong.

The idea of god is unique. You cannot compare the idea of god to the idea of a pink shiny elephant. The idea of god is not the same as the idea of a tooth fairy or unicorn either. The idea of god is universal as every culture on this planet has come up with an original interpretation of the same idea or concept. Ask yourself why every culture, race, or creed on this world has a god. It is an innate idea to question our origin and our creation. We are born with it. IF you contrast the idea of god to something like a tooth fairy, you will find 1 instance of the tooth fairy in corporate American culture and thousands upon thousands of interpretations of god everywhere on the planet. If the idea of the tooth fairy was like the idea of god, every culture on the planet would have a tooth fairy as well, but guess what, they don't.

Science is only one way of looking through the prism, and you should also keep in mind that scientific laws are constantly changing as our instruments of discovery improve. 10 years ago if you tried to suggest that the speed of light is not constant, you would have been laughed at and called insane, as it was a "LAW" determined through objective means, today, our instruments have discovered that the speed of light is NOT constant after-all. What was LAW, based on "objective" and verifiable systems has changed, and it will continue to change forever. Science does not mean the truth, science is simply a way of looking at the universe, but there are others. Locking yourself in a room called science and saying it is the only way to discover the universe objectively is illogical and incorrect because as I already stated, scientific laws change when the instruments do, so how can anything in science be objectively true when it keeps changing?


>
>and the reason i implied you were religious is because the
>stuff you're saying is the 'argument' i hear from religious
>people when they try to compare atheism and theism. how
>atheism is similar to religion. it isn't, at all.


That is not solely my opinion. There are teams of atheists who put as much fervor into their form of belief as Christians do. Have you ever met a douchebag atheist that shits on god and tells you for certain there is no god? I'm sure you have. Whats the difference between him and a Christian? Nothing because neither has enough proof to support their claims. They are the same. Looking at God from opposing ends of the same spectrum.

>
>maybe you're agnostic, and that's cool. but you're looking at
>this from the wrong perspective. atheism is not dependent on
>what anybody deems to be a god.

Not what anyone deems to be a god, but on the idea of GOD itself. THE VERY IDEA of god is ESSENTIAL to being an atheist. You simply cannot be an Atheist without raising the idea of god. You cannot be an Atheist without god, period. The idea of Atheism is built on the idea of god.

As for me, I am not agnostic, atheist, nothing. I am nothing, and I am everything. I have no labels and I will never be foolish enough to take one on.

>
>NO, that is incorrect. I have studied Mythology and Theology
>in great depth and I assure you that ancient gods were not
>thought of as real. They were symbols. Why do you think there
>is a god for every aspect of nature or human experience? I can
>provide you with a full history on where religious symbolism
>came from if you are interested.
>

nah i'm good. like i said, it wasn't relevant anyway.


>
>Semantics. The basic diagram remains.
>
>"God" or spiritual being at the apex of the triangle, belief
>and non belief at the opposing ends of the base.
>

why does it have to be a triangle? how about simplifying this 'equation' even more by making it a straight line with two points marked "Belief" and "Non-Belief"? no need to overcomplicate this, chief.

to be fair though, i'm not really sure what you're getting at by bringing this up. all you're saying is that you can't have atheists without theists or atheism without theism. i guess on that i agree. but still, it's pretty fruitless arguing semantics like that.

>
>The idea of god is unique. You cannot compare the idea of god
>to the idea of a pink shiny elephant. The idea of god is not
>the same as the idea of a tooth fairy or unicorn either. The
>idea of god is universal as every culture on this planet has
>come up with an original interpretation of the same idea or
>concept. Ask yourself why every culture, race, or creed on
>this world has a god. It is an innate idea to question our
>origin and our creation. We are born with it. IF you contrast
>the idea of god to something like a tooth fairy, you will find
>1 instance of the tooth fairy in corporate American culture
>and thousands upon thousands of interpretations of god
>everywhere on the planet. If the idea of the tooth fairy was
>like the idea of god, every culture on the planet would have a
>tooth fairy as well, but guess what, they don't.

i know that every civilisation in the history of humankind has practised some sort of religious belief. there's no denying it at all. this would suggest that humans have an innate desire to believe in a creator or overseeing deity. but, it also suggests that we are a deeply curious and fearful species who may choose to make up answers to satisfy our anxieties about the universe.

i never said that humans have an innate desire to worship the tooth fairy, lol. i said some people believe weird shit, which can vary across culture or creed.

>
>Science is only one way of looking through the prism, and you
>should also keep in mind that scientific laws are constantly
>changing as our instruments of discovery improve. 10 years ago
>if you tried to suggest that the speed of light is not
>constant, you would have been laughed at and called insane, as
>it was a "LAW" determined through objective means, today, our
>instruments have discovered that the speed of light is NOT
>constant after-all. What was LAW, based on "objective" and
>verifiable systems has changed, and it will continue to change
>forever. Science does not mean the truth, science is simply a
>way of looking at the universe, but there are others. Locking
>yourself in a room called science and saying it is the only
>way to discover the universe objectively is illogical and
>incorrect because as I already stated, scientific laws change
>when the instruments do, so how can anything in science be
>objectively true when it keeps changing?
>

i'm actually interested to hear what other ways there are to look through the prism. care to list a few of your preferred methods? seeing as you don't like the outdated scientific method too much.

>
>That is not solely my opinion. There are teams of atheists who
>put as much fervor into their form of belief as Christians do.
>Have you ever met a douchebag atheist that shits on god and
>tells you for certain there is no god? I'm sure you have.
>Whats the difference between him and a Christian? Nothing
>because neither has enough proof to support their claims. They
>are the same. Looking at God from opposing ends of the same
>spectrum.
>

you get dickhead christians and dickhead atheists. i never said you didn't. again, we're in agreement.


>
>Not what anyone deems to be a god, but on the idea of GOD
>itself. THE VERY IDEA of god is ESSENTIAL to being an atheist.
>You simply cannot be an Atheist without raising the idea of
>god. You cannot be an Atheist without god, period. The idea of
>Atheism is built on the idea of god.
>

you can't have aTHEISM without THEISM. i get it.

>As for me, I am not agnostic, atheist, nothing. I am nothing,
>and I am everything. I have no labels and I will never be
>foolish enough to take one on.
>

keep that free spirit burning bright, tek

>nah i'm good. like i said, it wasn't relevant anyway.

Ofcourse it's relevant. If you are to be an Atheist, it should be clear what you are choosing *not* to believe in. It seems to me that you are not well versed with theological history and sweep everything that came from ancient times under one rug called "God", which you believe is a thinking, living, breathing, personality. That could not be further from the truth.

>
>
>>
>>Semantics. The basic diagram remains.
>>
>>"God" or spiritual being at the apex of the triangle, belief
>>and non belief at the opposing ends of the base.
>>
>
>why does it have to be a triangle? how about simplifying this
>'equation' even more by making it a straight line with two
>points marked "Belief" and "Non-Belief"? no need to
>overcomplicate this, chief.

Sure, which makes the LINE you drew representative of "God". Since that is what the belief and non-belief are entangled with, placed upon. You cannot separate it.

>
>to be fair though, i'm not really sure what you're getting at
>by bringing this up. all you're saying is that you can't have
>atheists without theists or atheism without theism. i guess on
>that i agree. but still, it's pretty fruitless arguing
>semantics like that.
>

Although that is true, I am simply stating that Atheism is not possible without god, and therein lies the hilarious irony.


>
>i know that every civilisation in the history of humankind has
>practised some sort of religious belief. there's no denying it
>at all. this would suggest that humans have an innate desire
>to believe in a creator or overseeing deity. but, it also
>suggests that we are a deeply curious and fearful species who
>may choose to make up answers to satisfy our anxieties about
>the universe.
>

I agree with that. I am simply stating that comparing god to a pink shiny elephant is fallacious as the idea of god is unique and objective to humanity.


>>
>
>i'm actually interested to hear what other ways there are to
>look through the prism. care to list a few of your preferred
>methods? seeing as you don't like the outdated scientific
>method too much.

Hehe. I love science. I take it for what it's worth but I am not a materialist, that is to say, someone that bases their views solely on the physical universe. There are many unseen forces which govern our lives, one being gravity, we don't really know what it is but we can experience and measure it. How about Dark Matter, and Dark Energy? Unseen forces govern our lives, and yet most materialists swear the only way to understand the universe is through physical reality. What an ironic conundrum, that science is so immersed in the physical reality, all while built on completely unseen forces.

Anyhoo, other vehicles of discovery include art, song, dance, music. Other forms include spirituality or the use of psycho active plants. Your own body is an instrument of trial and error, of discovery, and being.

Rhetoric and logic, thought and philosophy are another form of discovery. Many of our greatest achievements were dreamed up in the space of a limitless and immaterial thought process. Democracy, the republic, peace and justice, virtue, law and honor, these are not scientifically physical things we can put in a test beaker and study, they are immaterial forces which govern our best ideals, actions, and cooperation.

The interesting thing is, that these realities were inspired by nature itself, which ultimately, is our greatest tool of discovery. Indigenous people discovered that if they over fished the rivers, the people down the river would suffer, and so virtue was born. Where do you think our high ideals come from? They do not originate nowhere, they originate all around us, in our environment, our soul, our experience of being human.

Religion is another tool of discovery. I will assume that your perception of religion is governed by no more than the last 600 years. Do you know the origins of religion and the purpose for it? It was not to pray to unseen thinking and living gods that punish or reward us. It was a way for the indigenous man to give gratitude to the super physical forces of nature, which were identified as allegorical symbols. The original symbol of god was a simple stone, because it represents the alchemical transformation of unseen forces into physical matter. The pyramid of Gyza is a fantastic example of allegorical stone symbolism. The next symbols were animal symbols in the form of totem poles and animal spirits. Next came the symbol of hybrid gods, part animal, part man, and finally, we arrived at man himself. Gods were formed in the shape of a man to be easier for people to relate to, not because they were actually believed to be human. Man sought something he/she could relate to in the physical sense because the simple stone, and animal spirit has lost its charm and power.


>
>you get dickhead christians and dickhead atheists. i never
>said you didn't. again, we're in agreement.
>


Right, and both stand on the same ground with the same amount of proof. They are opposing sides of the same coin. They are opposing ends of the same line, and that line is "god".


>
>you can't have aTHEISM without THEISM. i get it.

Not just that. You can't have NOTHING without SOMETHING. There is a dual reality that governs all our thinking, however, specifically in the context of our conversation, you cannot be an atheist without evoking god into being, and I think that is ironic.

>
>keep that free spirit burning bright, tek

Thanks Mark!

you cant have any of it without fear of death..

They all start in the same exact place..

fear of dying and being sad for burying people you know..

You do NOT need a superior being to have an atheist.. especially since god/s come late in the game

all these intricate & apologetic paragraphs all boil down to one thing

>You do NOT need a superior being to have an atheist..
>especially since god/s come late in the game

Are you replacing god with death? or saying that the idea of god was constructed to cope with the reality of death?

fear of death came before anything else..

and time to think about it of course..

>fear of death came before anything else..
>
>and time to think about it of course..
>
>

It's a good argument, however, the very first logos was the sun, ironically, because it delivered people from the night and the fear which came of darkness. Is it possible that darkness was a symbol of death? Yes, but it was also a symbol of something that was felt by the senses, and experienced in the immediate as opposed to the afterlife, or after death. You can't see in the dark, it's cold, and predators are lurking. The sun brought light, gave birth to crop, and warmed the world, and so it was god, because it brought birth and creation. It was something that was sure and timely and only gave and created. In almost any spiritual literature you will find innumerable references to light, or enlightenment. If you simply analyze spiritual literature you will find a much deeper understanding of life than you will of death, to me, that lends to suggest that the fear of death was not as pronounced as it is today, and partly because we have lost our way.

The fear of death is an illusion much like life and death are an illusion. One cannot exist without the other and so they are the same thing, what you think you perceive as life and death was handed to you by society. If you look back far enough you will find many cultures that did not fear death at all and embraced it as a privilege. Plato, among other noted philosophers including Pythagoras traveled to Egypt to be initiated into mystic schools which passed down the knowledge of previous generations. The library in Alexandria was said to be over 10,000 years old. Egypt was not a society which feared death, and neither was the Mayan or other Indian civilizations, the Tibetan monks have a guide on how to experience death to your advantage in The Tibetan Book of the Dead. You will not find a god in those cultures that is the salvation for death. You will only find more life.

I agree fear of death has increased as civilization as grown/advanced... our attachments to things/people/ideas have strengthened that..


Umm you know Library in Alexandria was constructed by Ptolemy right? That's only like 3rd century kid

>Umm you know Library in Alexandria was constructed by Ptolemy
>right? That's only like 3rd century kid

I'm not a kid, and to clarify, it contained volumes over 10,000 years old.

where you get those facts from...

and facts in the factual sense not facts in the "truth" sense of Ptolemy's time either

And the only thing we say to death is, 'Not today.'" (c) Syrio Forel.

It speaks to the human spirit and our perseverance. It truly is a majestic thing to experience humanity and all that it entails.

This conversation reminds me of something interesting. There were established religions which today would be referred to as devil worshipers. They served demons because they theorized that they better start serving their future masters in death, ha! There are other interesting interpretations of demons, one is free masonic, freemasonry is derived from Egyptian mythology and theology and represents about 3% of what we have learned from Egyptian mysticism, the other 97% has been destroyed. Demons were considered as aids to god and of god. According to this thinking, god left the keys to the kingdom to heaven with demons as guardians. All of this is of-course allegory and what it means that if you conquer your own demons, you enter a heaven of your own making. Eastern spirituality supports this thinking because it suggests we are already in heaven and must realize it, this is why Lucifer is called the light bringer in free-masonic philosophies and why lucifer is the son of the morning. It is a symbol of the conquered demon which gave you the keys to the kingdom of god.

I definitely almost replied that at some point.. lol

shits mad true.. 2 gods really.. death and the Sun..

>I definitely almost replied that at some point.. lol
>
>shits mad true.. 2 gods really.. death and the Sun..

There are "gods, hybrid gods, and animal gods" to embody almost any human emotion/experience or element in nature.

yea.. but I live in Cali.. so I only worship them 2..

and Big Booty gods.. but that's a Twin God

I still think my argument stands...

(lack of) belief in no deities exists before any belief IN them..

>I still think my argument stands...
>
>(lack of) belief in no deities exists before any belief IN
>them..

I think it is impossible for you to say for certain unless you have a direct reference. I personally don't know, we are both speculating about the time period that came right after the supposed awakening of man's consciousness from the grip of total animal instinct. If we are to go by the theory that people came from primates, than we are speculating about the beliefs primates have/had. There are thousands of relics from the ancient past and there are many ones depicting death and far more depicting life.

Personally, I think its really impossible to separate, I think the fear of death brings an immediate response of what comes after death. Is it natural to assume that something or someone is waiting for us? I have looked at countless volumes of text on this from all over the world and there are written records of high priests performing out of body rituals to initiate members into their schools. People were doing things that most consider impossible. Men who have traveled beyond the veil of death and come back. From every corner of the world there have been spiritual masters who taught that life and death are illusions, 2 expressions of one process.

Today, I think people fear leaving their loved ones behind more than death itself.

If we are to go by the theory that
>people came from primates, than we are speculating about the
>beliefs primates have/had.


^^^that is not a theory, not even in the slightest. If you cant/wont concede to that then there really is no argument from your perspective, but only wishful thinking


i like what you're trying to wrestle with but that part is not advancing your argument

>
>^^^that is not a theory, not even in the slightest. If you
>cant/wont concede to that then there really is no argument
>from your perspective, but only wishful thinking
>
>
>i like what you're trying to wrestle with but that part is not
>advancing your argument

Scientific laws and facts change. There are only a few things I can say for certain. As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out on everything fundamental. Our understanding is infinitesimally small, and it is full of holes and presuppositions that stand as the foundation for our best attempts. As long as our technology keeps improving so will our understanding of physical laws that we think are rigid.

as well as the primates we share our heritage with


I feel you about hard science ect, but there are some things that are just in the bag and not up for debate anymore. The earth will never be flat again in any science. Some of the stuff we figured out won't go the opposite direction.

You give the prefix to those who don't believe instead of those who do.

This means you need to the "idea" of ANYTHING in order to have UNbelief in said thing.

In reality, I'm just existing. You're the one making up shit and are therefore worthy of the prefix.

Or you could say I'm sane, and you're INsane.

Suddenly I'm an UNbeliever because you made up the flying spaghetti monster?

Nah.

See how that works?

this only works if you call yourself an Atheist and subject yourself to the variables of that term.

>this only works if you call yourself an Atheist and subject
>yourself to the variables of that term.
>

What you said above on applies to someone who rejects a god but still believes in that god.
If you're saying this also applies to the flying spaghetti monster, then it's true for anything,
because we have to label ourselves anti-flyingspaghettimonsterists and whatever other
made up creature there may be.

At what point do you feel we're simply talking sanity vs insanity?

and I really wish that all people (and especially black Americans) would quit reducing things to simple dichotomies, especially given that sooo much of who/what we are/were is not actively on the ideological table for many of us.

our original systems/ concepts of spirituality.

Its like trying to explain or fit a Dodecahedron into a straight line.

Knowledge of self is the most important quest and has very little to do with the dichotomies which govern our lives.

A lot of buddhist concepts would work well for us. The idea that every man and woman is a God or Buddha onto themselves dates back to ancient African religions.

Meditation would be a better stress reliever for those goin thru the struggle than praying.

The idea of limited minds that have traces from outside forces and the necessary steps to attain "big mind" would help a lot of us too. The traces of eurocentrism on our minds influences how we see ourselves, how we see the world, what we do and what we don't do.

also, I LOVE the buddhism isn't anachronistic to atheism. IMO they actually go together QUITE well.

I'm reading a book called Buddhism without Beliefs right now. Atheism comes out of an attachment to an ego that thinks it has the answers. Gautama himself was a humanist, he simply didn't care and wouldn't respond to questions about metaphysical origins of humanity or the afterlife. He was all about freedom and inner contentment in this lifetime.

You don't have to give up your own religion to pick up buddhist philosophy, either. You meditate in the morning and pray at night.

One deals in belief, the deals in knowledge. When you deal w/them both on equal terms, they are, effectively the same.

agreed.

as an atheist, buddhism is my favourite religion.

although, i did read the tibetan book of living and dying and it had some pretty cringe-worthy, dogmatic religious-esque bullshit in there. calling the dalai lama "his holiness" doesn't sit well with me either.

>
>as an atheist, buddhism is my favourite religion.

*shrugs*

it's like picking my favourite disease, but if i had to go with one it'd be buddhism.

it preaches some pretty helpful and pragmatic stuff. well, when you compare it to other religious beliefs, that is.

i'd rather have "find nirvana" than "cut off the enemy's head if they dispute god" or "no sex until marriage".

Wish there was an alternative for yall, not that SGI is 'bad', just that there should be a better vehicle

>Wish there was an alternative for yall

there is, it's called Zen and it's fantastic!

real question.

someone invited me to an SGI service not too long ago...

than white Christians in social settings?

ever been around evangelicals?

but what do you mean?

but things like asking people to join hands for grace when dining out or at a dinner party, asking "where do you go to church" not "do you go to church". I've been introduced to a friend of a friend and dude straight up asked "do you love Jesus"?

asking about my "Church Home" or if i'm "Saved"
or off jump assuming that i'd be interested in joining their daily Upliftment Email newsletter.

they are usually happier when they do it though...

>but things like asking people to join hands for grace when
>dining out or at a dinner party, asking "where do you go to
>church" not "do you go to church". I've been introduced to a
>friend of a friend and dude straight up asked "do you love
>Jesus"?

But white Christians are definitely like that here.

Except maybe replace "Do you love Jesus" with "Are you on fire for Christ."

.

than any other race.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

in a LONG TIME

"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

My boy been threatened with conversion from his JW former bride-to-be

Good thing he cut loose cause WOW he ended up with someone 10 times better

you either don't really know that many white people or you don't know certain types of white people

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

i would say my black and white fb friends from the south are equally religious.

and although I am not quite an Atheist, I enjoy the conversations.

not being an Atheist?

i'm not an atheist, can't say im very religious either. but i hate seeing people just believe things bc they're expected to or feel forced to.

can we bring polytheism and sun worship back tho!!

and i don't clap to this at all.

I'm just trying to understand why it's noteworthy that "black atheists" are on the rise...


>I'm...LOVING IT
>
>I mean...theres still not that many of us...and I wish more
>women were on game and open to at least changing their minds
>without turning them completely off.
>
>But I truly have to thank the internet and web-forums for
>changing the ability for atheists to connect and express
>themselves.

Its amazing to see christians realize that there people with different views out there

...

.

at least.

like, forreal?

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>

but im banned tho.
____________

Dallas Cavericks LETS GO!!

or make other people atheist.

But what I do appreciate is more people feeling like they can question their beliefs or outright declare their non-belief more and more. Because there's NO limit to the amount of Christian quotes, pics, testimonies, and general allusions to church, prayer, etc. out here. It's inescapable. And that's fine that people want to talk about their faith and it's part of their lives. But for a while agnostics/atheists felt silenced I think. Shamed about it. Unable to talk about it as openly, especially in Black circles.

I haven't gone a day without seeing some kind of Christian or Faith-based anything in eye or ear-shot. So when I see a few FB posts that are opposite of that - definitively so - then it's like *exhale*

I've been able to navigate as a non-believer without any known problems amongst my own kind. I don't usually entertain religious talk and I'm comfortable with letting it be known, but I don't go broadcasting it.


Kev

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

reads and Atheist snark darts that will be thrown for dear life and points and shit...

yasssssssss buddha!!! yassssssssssssssss!! LMAO

*snacks on some freshly popped organic popcorn in the third row, center seat.* :) :) :) :) :) :)

And I think the breakdown in belief is helping to fuel this no new friends/fuck everybody mentality out there now

Its like a verbal way of holding on to the stuffed bear

I just care if they have love in their heart and for the world around them

Atheism to me as it stands today is basically a slightly more deserved analog to white people screaming about "reverse racism".


I don't care what you don't believe in, I want to know how you personally grapple with the human condition and questions of existence and reality.

Saying that you don't believe in the most popular group of myths and parables isn't particularly...brave, in my opinion.

But if it really feels like a relief to "come out" for some black people then by all means, wave your atheist flag proudly. I'm just not going to be excited for someone celebrating that they don't believe in someone else's particular worldview. That seems like a waste of energy. I also don't spend time celebrating the fact that a lot of people don't believe in Zeus or Gilgamesh.



"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

meaning, since it wasn't proven then it won't be cosigned?


And do you think that people raised in whatever faith that leave the fold, regardless of being outcasted, are not being courageous? Serious questions


ridiculing ideas we know not to be true is just the changing of the guard as far as I'm concerned, especially when they are outdated and cause people not to consider an alternative.

>meaning, since it wasn't proven then it won't be cosigned?

I don't think it's that simple since being a scientist and being a theist aren't mutually exclusive, I wouldn't presume to speak for such a large group of people.

That being said, my point wasn't whether or not being a scientist was an alternative to being an atheist, it was that I find posts and discussions revolving around "I don't believe in your fictional sky father, aren't I smart, heeheehee!" less interesting or worthy of consideration than posts like "Did you read about how that paper on cosmic expansion was flawed" or "What do you think of P-Zombies"?


>And do you think that people raised in whatever faith that
>leave the fold, regardless of being outcasted, are not being
>courageous? Serious questions

If you're a 16 year old girl who fled from a radical ultra-orthodox Mormon compound or you had the gay beaten/prayed out of you by some closeted self-hating overweight southern preacher, but you never gave in to their hatred then I want to buy you dinner and hear your story. You're a tough muthafucka and you are worthy of praise.

If you just had to go to church and listen to some stories until you were 18, you need to get the fuck over it. Parents do all types of shit that annoys their kids. You can't find a way to get around their religion? You've never had to make peace with someone who has different politics than you do? It's part of living in society. Get used to it. You don't deserve a medal for having a different set of beliefs than other people.


>ridiculing ideas we know not to be true is just the changing
>of the guard as far as I'm concerned, especially when they are
>outdated and cause people not to consider an alternative.

Ridicule away, but saying it's a changing of the guard is a bit much. You're against superstition, and hey, more power to you, but you aren't actively replacing the large of amount of communal infrastructure that religion represents. I'm sure you think most of it's for the bad, but unless you're planning on opening up some hospitals and soup kitchens in the name of atheism, I wouldn't lay it on so thick.


"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

>
>If you just had to go to church and listen to some stories
>until you were 18, you need to get the fuck over it. Parents
>do all types of shit that annoys their kids. You can't find a
>way to get around their religion? You've never had to make
>peace with someone who has different politics than you do?
>It's part of living in society. Get used to it. You don't
>deserve a medal for having a different set of beliefs than
>other people.
>
>


Absolutely

all that just to say you don't like my style? Thats fine, chief. it doesn't change the root of it


"It aint as simple as ridiculing religions/dieties' blah blah blah . Yes it is sport.

You don't have to get into a long philosophical discourse about the complexities of man and his relationship to his surroundings to understand that these simple distinctions allow us to move forward with more important matters.


And thats your take on courage, that it takes a little girl to go through all of that just be recognized? Thats very dishonest on your part, but that seems to be your thing, although not so subtle, but whatever

And no one has to fill a void of a human constant, such as the communal spirit. Its pretty silly to think otherwise.


But fair enough homie, i get it what you're saying, but it still bullshit lol

Does Sarah Palin strike you as the type of person who gets into long philosophical discourses about the complexities of anything?

No? So then was that you just taking a cheap shot because I had the nerve to respond to some questions you asked me, based I'm going to assume, on the fact that I rubbed you the wrong way in a completely different thread?

>all that just to say you don't like my style? Thats fine,
>chief. it doesn't change the root of it

Uh, no. I said all that to respond to the questions you asked me. This isn't about you. I couldn't give two shits about your "style". I only responded about your "style" because I thought that final statement you made sounded kind of smug. Everything preceding that final paragraph was in response to what you asked, it wasn't a roundabout way of getting to a place where I could talk about you or your "style". You seem to think that you and your opinions hold more weight in my mind than they actually do.

Next time, if you don't want me to talk about your "style", don't end your statements by bringing them up. Or do, I genuinely don't give a fuck, it just seemed weird that you would bring up your personal rational for doing something, and then get annoyed when I address it.

>"It aint as simple as ridiculing religions/dieties' blah blah
>blah . Yes it is sport.

If it's that simple for you, ok. I think that's kind of juvenile, but I'm not you, so don't let me stop you from boiling the whole thing down to self-satisfied sarcasm.

>You don't have to get into a long philosophical discourse
>about the complexities of man and his relationship to his
>surroundings to understand that these simple distinctions
>allow us to move forward with more important matters.

You don't have to do a lot of things. Just because you don't like to, that doesn't mean it isn't a worthwhile endeavor for someone else.

I don't think acting like a know-it-all 13 year old with a reddit account is worthwhile, but hey it works for...some people, so who am I to judge?

Also, wouldn't it behoove us to just focus on those more important matters as our principle goal? It seems to me that the greatest thing to kill off superstition has been advancements in science...not people guffawing at parishioners. And yet, I see far more people ridiculing religion online than I do people championing science.

>And thats your take on courage, that it takes a little girl to
>go through all of that just be recognized? Thats very
>dishonest on your part, but that seems to be your thing,
>although not so subtle, but whatever

How is that dishonest? Because I can distinguish between someone who actually survived a traumatic event and people whining about first world, minor inconveniences?

If you honestly believe that I was implying that your situation needs to be absolutely extreme to warrant admiration then you are being dishonest, but I'm not going to join in on a circle jerk for people who had a few shouting matches with your parents.

There are people in this world who really suffer for religion. There are people in this world who really suffer for their politics. There are people in this world who really suffer for their sexuality. And I'm being dishonest, by reserving my admiration for them and not people who may or may not have to deal with some uncomfortable Thanksgiving dinners?

FOH.


>And no one has to fill a void of a human constant, such as the
>communal spirit. Its pretty silly to think otherwise.

Human constant? Communal spirit?

I was talking about actual organizations, with actual structures, filled with actual people, and you're talking about a bunch of new agey shit.

This would be funny if it wasn't so goddamn ridiculous.

Anyway, I never said anyone "HAD" to do a fucking thing...but people do ponder those questions, and even if you can imagine a world where people never pondered their existence or questions of that nature, it's a moot point because we live in a world were people have and do, so even if religion were stamped out tomorrow, unfortunately for you there would still be people philosophizing about the natures of existence, sentience, and sapience. Which by the way aren't necessarily religious questions.

"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

i was just calling you on your bullshit, you know, how scientists & atheists are not the same, act lol


I called you sarah palin because you're getting so emotionally long winded but still sayin nothing


but I'm glad you got that off your chest, and it definitely personal with you, I think you proved your point though


next time this discussion comes up ill pander with pretty words and a soft touch, still won't change the truth

>i was just calling you on your bullshit, you know, how
>scientists & atheists are not the same, act lol

The bullshit of two words having two different meanings? Or the bullshit of saying that championing science and militant atheism are two different things? Because neither of those are bullshit.



>I called you sarah palin because you're getting so emotionally
>long winded but still sayin nothing

Or I know how to articulate an argument, instead of just relying on insults and trollish behavior.

I find it funny that you keep saying that I'm not saying anything, but I've yet to actually see you deconstruct my statements to prove that. Instead, you respond flippantly, as if you're above it all, when really several people here have identified you as a troll.

So, go on dodging and evading an actual discussion, that seems to be what you're best at.

>but I'm glad you got that off your chest, and it definitely
>personal with you, I think you proved your point though

...That's sad. Maybe you shouldn't respond to me anymore if it's becoming personal.

>next time this discussion comes up ill pander with pretty
>words and a soft touch, still won't change the truth

Well no one asked you to do that, but since you seem to be so hell bent on debating things that I'm neither saying nor implying, you speak however you feel you need to. It's not like I have to worry about you saying anything thought provoking.

How much you want to bet the next time you reply to me in a different thread you start in on the personal attacks before I do? Again.


"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

it looks that way

93% of members in the national academy of science identify as atheist

when it actually does


it really is that simple

If you mean me, I said, that two categories of people aren't mutually exclusive, which is true by the fact that 7% of scientists aren't atheists.

If you want my opinion now that someone posted a statistic, okay. The overwhelming majority of scientists are atheists, and a strong understanding of the scientific method correlates to not believing in a deity.

Now, please tell me how what I said before about those two groups not being mutually exclusive was false, or how I implied that the statistic offered was meaningless.

"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

i think you're done for now lol

You can't prove that what I said was wrong, and you can't prove that I made an argument that I didn't make.

If anything the statement you made was factually inaccurate. Atheist and scientist don't mean the same thing since the statistic (that you didn't find I might add, you should thank someone who actually knows how to debate...) you cites proves that 7% aren't atheists. Unless you think 7% is statistically insignificant...in which case you might want to talk to some scientists about that.

Furthermore, I was never trying to suggest that the majority of scientists believed one way or the other, and I explicitly said that in my response. Where did I say, "Scientists are just as likely to believe in god than not" or anything of the sort?

Now, you can either debate the point I actually made, about scientists and religious people not being mutually exclusive, or you can continue the behavior you've been showing in these past two threads.

If it's the latter I'm just going to ignore your responses.

Let me guess the next one, "Hahaha, you made a fool of yourself."

Now, unless that response contains an actual, logical, walk through of how I contradicted myself, don't expect my response. If you desperately need a response since as you said before, this is personal. Please just reread this post.



"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

I'm supposed to be the troll, not you. too scared to admit your own foolishness i guess


but ok ill stop

Damn I was hoping you were actually going to try. Oh well.

Have a good life.


"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts..." -The Bard

>>Now, unless that response contains an actual, logical, walk
>through of how I contradicted myself, don't expect my
>response. If you desperately need a response since as you said
>before, this is personal. Please just reread this post.
>
>


lol

i know there's no god. but i still pray under my breath when shit gets thick. if only for the calming effect.

i mean, fuck. do you enjoy sharing sobering realities w/your kids?

do you tell your wife she has put on a few pounds?

do i tell my grandma i'ont like custard pie - knowing she makes it JUST for my ass bc my dad (r.i.p.) LOVED it?

after you realize how infinitesimally small we all are - what the fuck is life w/o hope? what are you left with?

Don't care much for either.

believing in a certain Religion?

Feels like many Atheists don't believe in the Bible, but mainly point out all the "myths" and whatever else it is that they don't believe.

But...does that mean that you have to reject any idea that there is a creator, and does that mean everything was result of a Big Bang and not a God or even a collection of gods?

tangible evidence for. So while the possibility of some super powerful being creating the universe isn't outside the realm of possibilities, there's no reason to actively assert that because there is no evidence for it, and anyone who does actively assert that is now obligated to prove their position is valid.

The reason most atheists in America seem to be against the Bible in particular is because we live in a nation where the majority of people identify as Christians.

The food chain, all of our resources, human consciousness, etc etc...I get that each Religion has their own way of explaining how it all came to be, and that folks may not agree with their stance on it. And I can even see why someone who's not convinced on any Religion can feel that prayer is pointless. But I just can't get how someone can feel this was all a result of Scientific theories that weren't produced by some beyond brilliant force.

i don't get how a person can believe in an all powerful, all knowing magic fairy just b/c the earth exists. as if there's no other explanation for how the earth and all the objects therein came to be. as if there has to be any explanation for how it all came to be. or as if that explanation has to tied up in a pretty little package w/nice, comforting stories.

i don't 'get' that.

so what? i don't have to 'get' it. the fact that i don't 'get' it doesn't mean it's not a perfectly valid or fine way to live or conceive of the world. it conflicts w/how i conceive the world. so what? we don't all have to see the world the same way. the fact that some disagree w/how i see things doesn't make my way of seeing things wrong. it's not a popularity contest. i'm not worried that i'm going to lose something if i don't see the world the right way. i don't care.

>or as if that explanation has to tied
>up in a pretty little package w/nice, comforting stories.

I can understand this part, which is what I said about how I get that some folks may not agree with the Biblical view of creation.

My original point was just questioning why it is that there aren't more folks who are inbetween...and maybe there are. I know Nika is one. Basically feeling as if the Bible, or other creation stories are baseless and invalid...but still believing that some "fairy" did create it.

I'm not challenging either side at all, even though I spoke on the things I dont "get." So my question would be....do you know any folks who do fit in the group that I am speaking of?

I think the closest I can think of would be Religious Science...but some of their teachings seem to be overly inclusive, almost saying "there's some truth in every Religion, so let's take our favorite parts and put them together." They do have more of a scientific view on Creation, but it's still hugely influenced by other Religions...and some of their churches even appear to be Christian on the surface.

So my question would be....do you
>know any folks who do fit in the group that I am speaking of?

yes. my mother is one.

>I think the closest I can think of would be Religious
>Science...but some of their teachings seem to be overly
>inclusive, almost saying "there's some truth in every
>Religion, so let's take our favorite parts and put them
>together." They do have more of a scientific view on Creation,
>but it's still hugely influenced by other Religions...and some
>of their churches even appear to be Christian on the surface.
>

told me she was Atheist....then the next day said she was Agnostic....and then said she still goes to Church. She was confused, of course.

But yeah, in HS...they told us that Agnostics acknowledge that there's a God, but nothing else....not the Bible, don't pray to any God or worship one. The definitions I see online tend to sound more like "we don't believe there is or isn't a God, it's beyond anything we can prove." So maybe there is a bit of gray area with Agnostics as well.

i don't believe there is a god, so i'm an atheist. when i look at all the available evidence, there's nothing out there that points to anything supernatural.

but i also don't know if there is a god, so i'm agnostic. it's possible that the supernatural exists, i just don't know.

atheism and agnosticism are answers to two different questions. belief and knowledge, respectively.

you can be an agnostic christian, even though most christians are gnostics. you can be a gnostic atheist.

(you can be an atheist christian for that matter, but why would you?)

n'ermind
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

>The food chain, all of our resources, human consciousness,
>etc etc...I get that each Religion has their own way of
>explaining how it all came to be, and that folks may not agree
>with their stance on it. And I can even see why someone who's
>not convinced on any Religion can feel that prayer is
>pointless. But I just can't get how someone can feel this was
>all a result of Scientific theories that weren't produced by
>some beyond brilliant force.


no need to place emphasis on some grand maker.

the system is itself is amazing.

although yes agnostics might have problems with religion



i might be considered an agnostic
not too trouble over the concept of god
but religious organizations are always sideeye'd by me
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

ol "god is good but i'm sleepin in on sunday, fuck that" ass niccas

http://onpoint.wbur.org/2015/02/26/atheist-secular-life-god-morality


*****************************************
huh