Which religion you belong to?

[Boris Godunov]

Actually...I do.

AND Celine Dion.

But I love opera, dress impeccably and abhor manual labor. So it's a balance.

[LaurenX2C]

well I DO believe in God. Even if people say it isnt so. I wouldnt listen. Its somthing to look forward to so you dont die miserable. (who cares you die anyway?)

do you really need church in its present form? didnt jesus himself dislike large religous institutions and said they always strayed after awhile.


The church is still to harsh on women and gays. I dont understand this. God/Jesus never said he had any beef with gays and women.

[Q Classic]

yeah, i'm catholic. a pretty bad one, too. i know the doctrine (taught as a catechist in hs.), i went through all the early sacrements, and i've served as a lay person. but i've broken some of the main principles of the religion: premaritals, for one.

but it doesn't matter. not in the long run. none of us are perfect, and my understanding of god is that he doesn't expect us to be. he's out there, i think, just not in a form we can understand.

like the priests said, faith, not proof. i don't know for a fact if he's actually out there. i'm mystified and saddened that he allows rapists and murderers to exist. and i'm irritated every day that things don't go my way, or things don't end up right. heck, i don't even know if there is a reason for anything at all.

what it boils down to, for me, anyway, is that when i look up at the stars, or at the lake in chicago, or just walking around in the city, is that i'm absolutely nothing in the long run. a billion years from now, it won't matter. the sheer magnitude of the universe...

it's awfully lonely, don't you think? and believing there's a god, in any shape or form, well... it gives me a little feeling of warmth. that even though the universe itself doesn't give a damn about me, at least something does, even if it's only a self-delusion, or just a collective strength others that, as mauss says, becomes the deity.

[Kramerman]

i don't even know if there is a reason for anything at all.

There is. A logical explanation of everything. Everything has a rational cause and those causes have effects. Nothing super natrual about it at all.

it's awfully lonely, don't you think?

I found my atheism deprssing at first, knowing there wasnt going to be a light at the end of the tunnel, knowing that all that awaited me at death was non-existance, but it made me realize how truely precious life is. That is why I want to make something of myself, I want to be somebody. I only have one life to live, so I am gonna live it up.

it gives me a little feeling of warmth.

That feeling isnt warmth. It is false hope. I have had it before, but I won't be disapointed again, in religious terms at least.

even if it's only a self-delusion,

I will say nothing more. but here is a friendly wink

Kman

[Giancarlo]

For those who are finding atheism a bit depressing, I suggest looking into existentialism... I am an existentialist atheist.... (most existentialists are either agnostics or atheists but a few are religious)

[Q Classic]

There is. A logical explanation of everything. Everything has a rational cause and those causes have effects. Nothing super natrual about it at all.

that's not what i mean.
i don't know of any possible supernatural cause that creates pedophilia and what not. i know all the logical explanations.
i meant more along the lines of: i don't know how those things can exist, and why they last. i don't know why we're even here as a species.

I found my atheism deprssing at first, knowing there wasnt going to be a light at the end of the tunnel, knowing that all that awaited me at death was non-existance, but it made me realize how truely precious life is. That is why I want to make something of myself, I want to be somebody. I only have one life to live, so I am gonna live it up.

i know how precious life is. and that's what makes it lonely. we're given one chance, whether a heaven exists or not. we decide what makes us who we are. and i've decided, personally, that whoever i am, i have to accept that there will always be things greater than i am, as there are always things lesser than i. and one of those things greater than i am, well, might be god himself.

That feeling isnt warmth. It is false hope. I have had it before, but I won't be disapointed again, in religious terms at least.

it's not so much false hope. it's more the warm fuzzy feeling of acceptance that i'm essentially powerless and absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things, but that i can do something right now that will hold back the darkness for a brief moment. and god, whoever, whatever, he is, is doing the same thing.
why else would he create playthings?

[Kramerman]

why else would he create playthings?

Perhaps for some sort of Sadistic Pleasure???

[Skanky Burns]

He made a typo in universe.cpp

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
He made a typo in universe.cpp

int life = 1

*God*
Damn! I knew that should of been a zero, stupid compiler!

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ethelred
The catch with Weak Atheism is that is EXACTLY the same as being an Agnostic. There is no need for the concept except that some people have been intimidated by people that want to pretend that Agnostics are fence sitters.

Is not.

My signature shows the definition of Weak (or Negative) Atheism.

Agnostics are those who refuse to make a decision.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Kramerman


relax. Let the man have his "religion" in peace.

He is welcome to do that. Telling everyone they are going to hell and putting parts in big red letters is hardly what I call "in peace".

I wouldn't want some religious guy telling me what I should believe. I have had that happen, (never tell a Jahova's Whitness you are atheist/agnostic. I was calling myself agnostic at the time) and it is not fun.

Kman

I agree with that. However he did exactly what you said you wouldn't want. He wasn't discussing he was prosyletizing.

I was relaxed. I like debating that sort of stuff. However Troll apparently doesn't. He just wants to tell non-believers they are going to hell. He has done that before.

Telling JW's you are Agnostic IS FUN. However if its a problem for you I here that they run from Mormons so you could try claiming that. My mother would tell them she was Druid and danced naked under the trees. Well she did that once anyway.

I tell them about fossils and the SEVEN times that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has made failed predictions of the end of the world. Most of the people going door to door don't even know of ONE of the failed predictions much less that there have been seven. They don't just lie to us they lie to themselves. (Its OK by JW teaching to lie to non-JWs and they occasionaly do so).

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
For the record, I hate Barbara Streisand.

I thought she might have conflicted a bit with your taste in music.

I don't hate her. I like her in comedies. She can actually sing OK as well. Just that she sings the kind of songs I don't care for.

[Ethelred]

Is not.

My signature shows the definition of Weak (or Negative) Atheism.

Except that it is actually the EXACT definition of Agnostic.

Agnostics are those who refuse to make a decision.

Yes you are one of the intimidators. Well I am not intimidated by that bogus nonsense you are pushing. I made a decision. The decision to go on facts and not faith.

Saying I didn't make a decision isn't even nonsense. It simply false.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ethelred
Except that it is actually the EXACT definition of Agnostic.

Maybe it is your own version, but at least 90% of self-proclaimed agnostics will disagree.

One entry found for agnostic.
Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
- ag·nos·ti·cism /-t&-"si-z&m/ noun

Originally posted by Ethelred
Yes you are one of the intimidators. Well I am not intimidated by that bogus nonsense you are pushing. I made a decision. The decision to go on facts and not faith.

What facts? Besides, Atheism is not about faith, it is about the lack thereof. You got it backwards.

Originally posted by Ethelred
Saying I didn't make a decision isn't even nonsense. It simply false.

So what is your decision? Do you hold that there is no good reason to believe in the existence of one or more deities?

[Ethelred]

Atheist (n.): a person without beliefs in a deity or a group of deities.

Is the effectivley same as

: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

KEY ITEM. NOT COMMITED. If you believe in a god that is at least to some degree a commitment.

Since YOU are defineing Atheist to be same as Agnostic it is your definition that is bogus. Especially since yours does NOT say weak Atheist, which of course is still the same as Agnostic. Not a believer EITHER WAY in a god. Any belief is to some degree a commitment rather than no commitment at all.

What facts? Besides, Atheism is not about faith, it is about the lack thereof. You got it backwards.

That total lack of facts supporting the existence or non-existence of a general vaguely defined god, personal or otherwise. What facts there are do obviate certain particular types of god. Atheism is about not believing in a god. Its not about not having a faith since it is clear MANY Atheists actively disbelieve in a god of any kind. The late Madelyne Murry O'Hare being the most blatant example.

Its simple. Weak Atheism is indistinguishable from Agnosticism. Strong Atheism is quite different from either since it entails a specific belief about the existence of any god and must take it on faith since it is clearly impossible to disprove all conceivable gods.

I will say it again. Its not the fault of people that call themselves Agnostics that some people that call themselves Atheists are not Atheists. I get the feeling that you are an Agnostic but have been intimidated into to calling yourself something you are not.

Many religious people go on faith. They know that they can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a god. Clearly however they do not call themselves Agnostics. Thus Loinburgers definition of Agnostic is merely an exercise in obfuscating the differences in thinking on the subject.

Many Atheists actively disbelieve in all concievable gods. Since there is no way to prove that they have a religious belief. They do not however have a religion since a religion entails a belief in a god of some kind however vague and ill-defined.

Agnostics have been clearly defined EVEN BY THE DEFINITION YOU QUOTED as not having a belief either way in a god, for Agnostics hold that it is at least presently impossible to prove the existence of a god either way AND they have no commitment to a belief in a god.

Your still poorly labeled definition in your sig of a Wimpy Atheist has the same meaning as the one just above and the same meaning as the definition you chose from some uknown source.

Thus your version of Wimpy Atheist is indistinguishable from an Agnostic.