Which religion you belong to?

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
wow, a lot of atheists here (I don't remember past polls being so atheist heavy)

Jon Miller

Its Sunday. Maybe all the Christians are busy.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by loinburger


Agnosticism is not a metaphysical belief, it is an epistemological belief. You can believe in god(s) (a metaphysical belief) even though you don't believe that said god(s) can be proven to exist (an epistemological belief). So if somebody says "do you believe in God," and you respond "I'm an Agnostic," then you've failed to answer their question.

You are still just trying to blur the distinction.

Answering Agnostic DOES answer the question. Agnostics don't believe in a god. They don't actively disbelieve either. If a person believes in a god but thinks the existence of a god can't be proven they are NOT Agnostic. There a lot of people exactly like that. Lots of christians are fully aware that god cannot be proven. Just how many people have you ever seen claim there is proof for god except among fundamentalists that think their beliefs constitutes proof.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Ethelred


While Einstein often spoke of god in terms that sounded like he believed in a god it seems mostly matter of putting a label of convenience on his thinking. Think of it as objectifying the laws of nature.

Einstein on this subject:

From

http://www.religioustolerance.org/deism.htm

"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God. "

"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own - a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. It is enough for me to contemplate the mystery of conscious life perpetuating itself through all eternity, to reflect upon the marvelous structure of the universe which we can dimly perceive and to try humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested in Nature."

From

http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ebtomcat.htm

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

From

http://freethought.freeservers.com/reason/quotes.html

"I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism."

I would guess that he was halfway between an Agnostic and a Deist.

Thank you Etherlred. I was going to get a couple of his quotes after I read that post that dude made. But you beat me to it. I would say by your definition he is an agnostic, but by my definition a weak atheist (my definitions being like loinburger's, if i read them right - i just skimmed through). But the point of posting that pic was that he is my idol of science and mathematics, not the fact of his religious beliefs - I could care less if he was a fundamentalist muslim.

[Kramerman]

these are my definitions of the terms presently at arguement. I dunno if they are completely correct or not (though I think they are open to interpretation - there may not be anyone correct definition for someof them), but they are how I have used the words:

Deists- believe in clockmaker theory of God creating the universe and then running away and letting it go to its own devices, watching from a distance.

Agnostics- never deny the existance of a God, but just say it can not be proven whether one does or does not exist.

weak atheist(my definition of myself)- denys the existance of certain god(s), but finds it ignorant to completely rule out the possibility of the existance of supreme beings without ample evidence..

strong atheism- denys the existance of all gods. Finds the idea of supreme beings as being proposterous.

I am a weak Atheist, denying the existance of the God(s) spoke of in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and various mytholygies as false for various reasons. I think Jesus Christ was a normal man made into a 'tall tale', like Davey Crockett or Daniel Boone, but just to a much greater extent. Though, I dunno enough to rule out the possibilty of a supreme being, though this is dependent on ones definition of what exactly a supreme being is.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Ethelred
Answering Agnostic DOES answer the question. Agnostics don't believe in a god.

Agnostics believe that god's existence has not been proven or disproven, or that god's existence can never be proven or disproven, but being an agnostic does not necessarily mean that one believe or doesn't believe in god. Atheists don't believe in god, agnostics believe that god's existence hasn't or cannot be proven.

They don't actively disbelieve either.

They can disbelieve, they just acknowledge that there is no proof or that there can never be any proof for their beliefs. That's what makes them beliefs--you can't prove them.

If a person believes in a god but thinks the existence of a god can't be proven they are NOT Agnostic.

Sure they would. Defintion of an agnostic, from dictionary.com, is "One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God." The definition doesn't specify whether or not the person believes in god, though.

There a lot of people exactly like that. Lots of christians are fully aware that god cannot be proven.

Yup. Basically, if somebody isn't an agnostic, then they're an irrational lunatic.

Just how many people have you ever seen claim there is proof for god except among fundamentalists that think their beliefs constitutes proof.

Not many (although there are some atheists who claim the opposite using similarly nebulous proof), and they're all irrational lunatics.

[Kramerman]

Lots of christians are fully aware that god cannot be proven. Just how many people have you ever seen claim there is proof for god except among fundamentalists that think their beliefs constitutes proof.

Nearly every Christian I know has claimed their is ample proof that God exists and they call me an ignorant fool if I dont believe in Him. When I ask them of this 'proof', they often quote from the Bible. The number stuff, like 24 hours in a day, 52 weeks in a year, 365 days a year and that stuff that they generate by interpreting the Bible is usually the extent of their 'proof'. Whatever

[Felch]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Demonstrating your 'stereotypically American' ignorance on the issue eh? Dubya would be proud

Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, a Professorial Fellow of Queen Mary, U of London, shares this "stereotypically American" view. In Millenium he described Communism's religious aspects, such as the heaven on Earth of a Communist state, the moral codes, the compulsion to proselytise, its pattern of waxing and waning in influence, and the simple fact that it offers a replacement for traditional religions. Communism has quasi-religious tracts, promises for the faithful, and penalties for those who go against it, as well as a totally unrealistic notion of how people act in real life.

While Communism doesn't have invisible people living in the sky, it can be viewed as a sort of religion, if you don't have a stereotypically British narrow-mindedness about such things.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by loinburger

Yup. Basically, if somebody isn't an agnostic, then they're an irrational lunatic.

They could be a rational lunatic. Or just irrational. Religion is inheirenltly irrational. Many people are highly selective in what they are irrational about.

My sister has an irrational fear of grasshoppers.

I could swear that your definition of Agnostic makes half the christians in the US Agnostic. Try my version. It makes sense.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Kramerman


Nearly every Christian I know has claimed their is ample proof that God exists and they call me an ignorant fool if I dont believe in Him.

You must be surrounded by Southern Baptists or something similar. I sure never ran into that with many Catholics and I have even heard priests admit that they have faith not proof.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Felch X


Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, a Professorial Fellow of Queen Mary, U of London, shares this "stereotypically American" view. In Millenium he described Communism's religious aspects, such as the heaven on Earth of a Communist state, the moral codes, the compulsion to proselytise, its pattern of waxing and waning in influence, and the simple fact that it offers a replacement for traditional religions. Communism has quasi-religious tracts, promises for the faithful, and penalties for those who go against it, as well as a totally unrealistic notion of how people act in real life.

While Communism doesn't have invisible people living in the sky, it can be viewed as a sort of religion, if you don't have a stereotypically British narrow-mindedness about such things.

yes, religion can be many things besides tradition 'religion'

most assuredly captialism, communism, and nationalism have all been peoples religions

as have many other thigns

this is with the broader more abstract definition of religion (but one I like)

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Kramerman


Nearly every Christian I know has claimed their is ample proof that God exists and they call me an ignorant fool if I dont believe in Him. When I ask them of this 'proof', they often quote from the Bible. The number stuff, like 24 hours in a day, 52 weeks in a year, 365 days a year and that stuff that they generate by interpreting the Bible is usually the extent of their 'proof'. Whatever

I think most likely the people you are talking to are mistaking proof and evidence

you cannot fault people for not taking a logic class

Jon Miller

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Ethelred
I could swear that your definition of Agnostic makes half the christians in the US Agnostic.

Nothing wrong with that. If they've got a solid epistemological belief system like agnosticism, then their metaphysics won't be ****ing up their lives too much.

Try my version. It makes sense.

At the same time, your version of atheism is basically the same thing as nihilism. My version doesn't have so much baggage.

Generally it's all well and good to blend agnosticism and atheism like you're doing, though, since most non-atheists won't admit to being agnostics.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Ethelred


You must be surrounded by Southern Baptists or something similar. I sure never ran into that with many Catholics and I have even heard priests admit that they have faith not proof.

Yes, actually i am surrounded by southern baptists, and some episcopaleans, methodist, and lutherans as well, but mostly southern baptsist. The Catholics Ive known (coming from a catholic family) do tend to be more down to earth, though not always.

you cannot fault people for not taking a logic class

oh, but I can fault them, if for not having taken a logic class, then for not having a natrual sense of logic.

[Kramerman]

Ethelred, from what I've read, by my standards you are a weak atheist like myself, but that is by my definition.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by loinburger


Nothing wrong with that. If they've got a solid epistemological belief system like agnosticism, then their metaphysics won't be ****ing up their lives too much.

Try telling that to the Catholic priests that say its faith and there is no proof. I am sure they will differ with if you call them Agnostic. They might just consider it a troll. That would be the best result you could expect.

At the same time, your version of atheism is basically the same thing as nihilism. My version doesn't have so much baggage.

Nihilism is something else. Even a Deist could be a Nihilist. That just means that since nothing matters since there is no purpose to the universe. Its Atheism with suicidal depression and the lack of courage to carry through with their beliefs. Summed in "Life sucks then you die". Nihilism sucks.

Generally it's all well and good to blend agnosticism and atheism like you're doing, though, since most non-atheists won't admit to being agnostics.

I am not blending. That is what you are still doing.

After all there might be a god of some sort. Even a christian god although not the fundamentalist version of it. It would be nice if there was an afterlife. Wanting an afterlife is not the same as believing in one. It would be nice OUR life had some purpose besides the continuation of our species. The question that arises from that of course is, what is that gods reason for existence?