Convert Me...

[speedz99 145]

It made sense, though I suppose your wording could have been better.You were attempting to say that the statement "I don't know if there is a god" already assumes the possibility of god at all, arguably without warrant.We don't tend to do the same thing with other "possibilities" like "I don't know if there is a FSM."I think that's what your trying to say, yes?

Exactly, thank you.

[checkymcfold 0]

in a way that might differ from some of the atheists here, i'm an agnostic largely because i don't give a shit. functionally, i'm probably an atheist--if you really ask me lots and lots of questions, you can probably get me to say that i don't think god exists. but what the real thrust of my agnosticism is is that i don't care one way or the other, since it doesn't alter what i want to do with my life one bit. it's kinda like this:-if there is some god thing, and it wants me to be a good person, i'm trying to do that anyway as best i can.-if there isn't some god thing, ok, it doesn't affect me any in terms of how i'm living my life, so whatevz.(and here is the one that probably matters most, or is most "unique," or whatever)-if there is some god thing, and it wants me to be what i understand to be a bad person, it can smd. with regard to the last point, it doesn't matter if there is some god thing telling me what's right and wrong. i have my own idea of that, and if any sort of external thing tries to tell me to do something that goes against my own personal sense of morality, it makes me feel sick inside. so i don't do it. if i go to hell for that, so be it. but i'm not going to go against feelings that run through every fiber of my being for fear of my afterlife sucking, if there is one (and that i certainly don't believe)imo, religion shouldn't make you do things that don't fit with your worldview--religion should feel natural, and mesh well with whatever sort of logical or romantic approach you have to the world. if it doesn't, your search for the best religion or non-religion for you may not be over. but that's fine. people seem to get this idea in their head that they have to have a religion tell them what to think, and that seems entirely silly to me. if you believe something, you believe it--you shouldn't need a preacher or anyone else to help you with it. but that's not antithetical to seeking guidance from a religious figure, either, or shouldn't be, at least. for me, a sort of soft atheism/agnosticism happens to fit best with how i go about my life. for others, it may be different. and that's fine.best of luck with your own search, cinci.

[KramitDaToad 0]

Now, to KramitdaToadYou seem to think there is no difference between believing in God and being a christian, there is, in fact, a very big difference. To begin with, I could be a Jew or a Muslim, or I could simply believe that there is a higher power, but not necessarily the Christian idea of God. In other words, it's very easy to believe in God and not be a Christian, please don't make assumptions.

Maybe I should have included more of your quote then

I was raised Catholic, very Catholic, and gave it up about 6 years ago when I was 19 or so. I still believe in God

If you were not referring to the christian god you would have said "I still believe in a god". ie you would have been non specific and included the 'a' and not made the word god capitalised. You were referring to a single and very specific God, the christian god.

Did I use bad terminology by using the words "convert me?" Maybe, but I didn't find that out until later in the thread, so don't presume to jump down my throat. If I was trying to undersand what Muslims believe, or what Methodists believe, or what Jews believe, then using the term "convert me" would be very valid. Apparently, atheism isn't something you convert to, my bad. Obviously I didn't understand that, now I do, cut me a break.

It was pointed out to you quite clearly that Atheism is not a religion, not faith based and you don't convert to it. You follow these points with cute little lines like I feel like I've learned very little from this thread, but ok. which essentially says that all that was posted in response to your questions was not to your liking and therefore without validity. Disingenuous comments will illicit firm responses. You reap what you sow.

Finally, there's this...You don't get 'taught' to become an atheist. You don't have to learn anything other than how to think objectively.I don't like the bolded statement of yours at all, but it seems like atheists use it a lot. It doesn't seem to me like it means much of anything. It seems like atheism is this nebulous idea that stems from thinking objectively. You don't explain how you get from thinking "objectively" to believing that there is no god. Or is it just that when I start think "objectively" then some revelation will come over me and I'll realize that there is no god? Explain to me how you get from point a to point b, don't just say "you have to learn to think objectively."

Let's try an analogy.Imagine you are standing in a field. You can see the world around you. You can see the sun, the moon, the stars. You can see that when you pick up a rock and let it go it falls. You taste dirt and realise that it's not for eating. You squash an ant and it stops moving. To learn about the world around you, you make observations without assumptions. When you have enough information and need to build on your previous observations you make assumptions that are fact based.This is atheism. This is where we all start. This is what we are born into.Now around this field are a whole lot of trailers. When you enter one there are people in there that tell you how the world works and how it came to be. When you debate any point they insist is true and point to the field through the window as evidence they pull the curtains shut and insist that you need to have faith in what they are saying. That all the answers can be found but you must start with the assumption that the world came to be as they said. No debate on that point allowed.That is religion. Conversion is living in one trailer, pulling up stumps and moving to another where they insist that you adopt their assumptions unquestioningly.Returning to the field is stating that you will only work with assumptions that you can validate or those that can be validated. So your point a is how you learn whilst in the field. As I said before we all start this way, it's not until someone else takes us to one of the trailers that we can be considered Christian, Jewishm, Muslim etc If you maintain those principles when you enter a trailer you will find that the occupants have some serious explaining to do. If you continue to think objectively you find yourself staying in the field for answers. This is your point b.However all of this doesn't preclude that a trailer exists where the occupants are correct. Atheists are comfortable with this fact. They just haven't found that trailer yet.

[timwakefield 68]

However all of this doesn't preclude that a trailer exists where the occupants are correct. Atheists are comfortable with this fact. They just haven't found that trailer yet.

Meh, I disagree with the bolded statement. I am an atheist and also believe that Buddhism teaches the 'truth.'

[LongLiveYorke 38]

in a way that might differ from some of the atheists here, i'm an agnostic largely because i don't give a shit. functionally, i'm probably an atheist--if you really ask me lots and lots of questions, you can probably get me to say that i don't think god exists. but what the real thrust of my agnosticism is is that i don't care one way or the other, since it doesn't alter what i want to do with my life one bit. it's kinda like this:-if there is some god thing, and it wants me to be a good person, i'm trying to do that anyway as best i can.-if there isn't some god thing, ok, it doesn't affect me any in terms of how i'm living my life, so whatevz.(and here is the one that probably matters most, or is most "unique," or whatever)-if there is some god thing, and it wants me to be what i understand to be a bad person, it can smd.

This is more or less how I feel. In regards to the Santa Clause thing, it's pretty simple to demonstrate that the God of the Bible makes no sense. I find the idea laughable if not sad that a God would punish truly good people simply because they did not believe in him, or because they didn't go to church enough, or didn't go to the right church, or didn't pour enough water on their heads, or didn't play with snakes, etc, etc. It just would make so little sense to me to have a God that rewards and punishes based on our actions who rewards and punishes based on arbitrary motions and rituals to fuel his own vanity.So, whether or not there is a God or there is no God, I'm going to be a good person. I don't care either way because there's no evidence for me to care. Christians on this site accuse atheists of being angry and cynical people. I think it's the complete opposite. We rarely think about God in our daily lives. Though we argue fervently when we are in the middle of a discussion on the Internet or where have you, we don't let such discussions take over our lives. For me, this is because any version of God that is consistent with the world that I live in is happy with genuinely good people, and I strive to be a genuinely good person even without the threat of a God.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Meh, I disagree with the bolded statement. I am an atheist and also believe that Buddhism teaches the 'truth.'

There is no spoon, you dirty hippy.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

add me to the "doesn't give a shit list". I heard Paul P use the term apathist once, and that is certainly me. and just because i am angry and cynical, don't assume all skeptics, agnostics and atheists are. I don't want to ruin it for the rest of ya'll.

[crowTrobot 2]

imo, religion shouldn't make you do things that don't fit with your worldview--religion should feel natural, and mesh well with whatever sort of logical or romantic approach you have to the world. if it doesn't, your search for the best religion or non-religion for you may not be over. but that's fine. people seem to get this idea in their head that they have to have a religion tell them what to think, and that seems entirely silly to me. if you believe something, you believe it--you shouldn't need a preacher or anyone else to help you with it. but that's not antithetical to seeking guidance from a religious figure, either, or shouldn't be, at least. for me, a sort of soft atheism/agnosticism happens to fit best with how i go about my life. for others, it may be different. and that's fine.

that's a nice ideal - if everyone thought that way these debates would be unnecessary and pointless. the trouble is most of the people in the world have been brainwashed since birth to have their worldview conform to their religion instead of the reverse, and that IS what is natural and meshes for them. they aren't capable of formulating a sensical worldview independant of their religious belief because their religious belief becomes deeply ingrained as part of their ego. that is why you end up with people who think it is logical, romantic etc to undermine science education for the sake of spreading their belief, fly planes into buildings etc.

[timwakefield 68]

There is no god, you dirty hippy.

fizzle yo pizzle

[Southern Buddhist 1]

I seriously <3 just about everyone in this thread.And I seriously agree with just about everyone, even when you contradict each other. It is hard to say there is definitively no higher power, because we can't step outside our own planet/lives/spiritual plane/whatever to see if there is or not. Our observations are limited to our human means of observation, and to that which is observable by humans.At the same time, there is no reason at all to start out from an assumption that there _is_ such a power, and say "disprove this." It would be at least as valid, if not more so, to assume there is not. Santa can be disproved because no one ever got mysterious presents under the tree, but by that logic, god can be disproved because no one ever saw a miracle, unless they were already primed to explain things they didn't understand (or just unlikely things) as "miracles" in the first place. [in other words, I've NEVER known an atheist to read the story of Jesus and say, "Yep, that's a miracle, all right."]I can define decent moral behavior for myself and I can practice it without the threat of punishment making me do so. I just plain don't need G/god to make me a good person. If my definition of "good" includes murder and theft, the problem is with my mind. Maybe people like that DO need (G)god, if only to make life safer for the rest of us who are doing fine on our own. I think religion arose pretty much as a social enforcer: when humans first began to live in larger groups than just the family unit or a few linked families, they needed a way to enforce shared codes of behavior. Fear was the way to do it, and since they were already in terror of things like flood, drought, eclipse, winter, etc., fear of "god" was what arose.But, at the same time, I do have respect for people approach spirituality with humility, and who just ask their deity to help them be a better person, to make them kinder, gentler, wiser, more humble, more caring, more willing to stand up to injustice. I respect Einstein, but I also respect Martin Luther King, Thich Nhat Hanh, and the Dalai Lama. Maybe not everybody needs religion to do what they have done, but they, as individuals, did, and I don't begrudge them that. [Of course, two of them don't believe in God.]But, a moment of angry cynicism: religion = living in a trailer. Coming from the South, may I just say, "Oh, so true." QFT, man, QFMT.

[TheCinciKid 0]

in a way that might differ from some of the atheists here, i'm an agnostic largely because i don't give a shit. functionally, i'm probably an atheist--if you really ask me lots and lots of questions, you can probably get me to say that i don't think god exists. but what the real thrust of my agnosticism is is that i don't care one way or the other, since it doesn't alter what i want to do with my life one bit. it's kinda like this:-if there is some god thing, and it wants me to be a good person, i'm trying to do that anyway as best i can.-if there isn't some god thing, ok, it doesn't affect me any in terms of how i'm living my life, so whatevz.(and here is the one that probably matters most, or is most "unique," or whatever)-if there is some god thing, and it wants me to be what i understand to be a bad person, it can smd. with regard to the last point, it doesn't matter if there is some god thing telling me what's right and wrong. i have my own idea of that, and if any sort of external thing tries to tell me to do something that goes against my own personal sense of morality, it makes me feel sick inside. so i don't do it. if i go to hell for that, so be it. but i'm not going to go against feelings that run through every fiber of my being for fear of my afterlife sucking, if there is one (and that i certainly don't believe)imo, religion shouldn't make you do things that don't fit with your worldview--religion should feel natural, and mesh well with whatever sort of logical or romantic approach you have to the world. if it doesn't, your search for the best religion or non-religion for you may not be over. but that's fine. people seem to get this idea in their head that they have to have a religion tell them what to think, and that seems entirely silly to me. if you believe something, you believe it--you shouldn't need a preacher or anyone else to help you with it. but that's not antithetical to seeking guidance from a religious figure, either, or shouldn't be, at least. for me, a sort of soft atheism/agnosticism happens to fit best with how i go about my life. for others, it may be different. and that's fine.best of luck with your own search, cinci.

Very nice post checky. I like your sentiments alot. I have a good friend who was espousing very similar ideas just last night. I wish everyone thought like you, regardless of whether they had religion or not. The world would be a better place.

Maybe I should have included more of your quote thenIf you were not referring to the christian god you would have said "I still believe in a god". ie you would have been non specific and included the 'a' and not made the word god capitalised. You were referring to a single and very specific God, the christian god.I think you have a somewhat poor understanding of christianity (or maybe I do). I've always understood christianity to be a belief that Jesus Christ is God, as is God the Father (the Old Testament God). This is where we have our problem. I never said that I believe that Jesus Christ is/was God. Maybe I would have been clearer I had said that I believe in "a God," sadly I guess I'm not always completely clear (nor can anyone be). Truth is, at the moment I'm not really sure what I believe. I guess I tend to be more inclined to believe that there is a God, than to believe that there isn't, but I can't really explain why that is, other than maybe it was just ingrained in me so much from childhood that I can't shake it. At the moment, I guess I'd just as soon leave it at that.It was pointed out to you quite clearly that Atheism is not a religion, not faith based and you don't convert to it. You follow these points with cute little lines like I feel like I've learned very little from this thread, but ok. which essentially says that all that was posted in response to your questions was not to your liking and therefore without validity. Disingenuous comments will illicit firm responses. You reap what you sow.At whatever point I said what you've italicized, I probably felt that people weren't being all that clear. I now believe that I've learned quite a bit from this thread and I'm glad that I now have a better understanding of atheism.Let's try an analogy.Imagine you are standing in a field. You can see the world around you. You can see the sun, the moon, the stars. You can see that when you pick up a rock and let it go it falls. You taste dirt and realise that it's not for eating. You squash an ant and it stops moving. To learn about the world around you, you make observations without assumptions. When you have enough information and need to build on your previous observations you make assumptions that are fact based.This is atheism. This is where we all start. This is what we are born into.Now around this field are a whole lot of trailers. When you enter one there are people in there that tell you how the world works and how it came to be. When you debate any point they insist is true and point to the field through the window as evidence they pull the curtains shut and insist that you need to have faith in what they are saying. That all the answers can be found but you must start with the assumption that the world came to be as they said. No debate on that point allowed.That is religion. Conversion is living in one trailer, pulling up stumps and moving to another where they insist that you adopt their assumptions unquestioningly.Returning to the field is stating that you will only work with assumptions that you can validate or those that can be validated. So your point a is how you learn whilst in the field. As I said before we all start this way, it's not until someone else takes us to one of the trailers that we can be considered Christian, Jewishm, Muslim etc If you maintain those principles when you enter a trailer you will find that the occupants have some serious explaining to do. If you continue to think objectively you find yourself staying in the field for answers. This is your point b.However all of this doesn't preclude that a trailer exists where the occupants are correct. Atheists are comfortable with this fact. They just haven't found that trailer yet.I have one very simple problem with your analogy. I think it pre-supposes that people start out as a clean slate. Unfortunately, that's pretty much impossible. Our worldview is necessarily shaped by our childhood and our upbringing. Therefore, we don't start out in the field, we start out in one of the trailers. Well, some people may start out in the field, but it's a small number. And, it would seem to me that even if someone were to make it to your hypothetical field, their worldview is still going to be shaped by their upbringing and their background and that may make them more likely to choose one trailer over another. Anyway, I do get what you were trying to say. Let's declare a truce.

[checkymcfold 0]

cinci, why don't you talk some more about what it is you believe at this stage of your life (with respect to god, morals, the history of the universe, etc.), and maybe we can suggest various faiths that might jive with your worldview better than the one(s) you've tried thus far? you know, if that might be helpful....:)it's worth saying that not all christians have the idea that their god is the one god, or that they're worshipping something different from the islamic concept of allah or the jewish yaweh, etc. some do, some don't. i think this forum tends to pigeonhole and restrict its understanding of christianity a little bit sometimes, although i understand that it's largely because the sort of christianity espoused here is more often than not a bit fundamentalist.

[HollywoodAFD 0]

cinci, why don't you talk some more about what it is you believe at this stage of your life (with respect to god, morals, the history of the universe, etc.), and maybe we can suggest various faiths that might jive with your worldview better than the one(s) you've tried thus far? you know, if that might be helpful....:)it's worth saying that not all christians have the idea that their god is the one god, or that they're worshipping something different from the islamic concept of allah or the jewish yaweh, etc. some do, some don't. i think this forum tends to pigeonhole and restrict its understanding of christianity a little bit sometimes, although i understand that it's largely because the sort of christianity espoused here is more often than not a bit fundamentalist.

"You use your tongue better than a 2 dollar whore"---- Slim Pickens, BLAZING SADDLES

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

cinci, why don't you talk some more about what it is you believe at this stage of your life (with respect to god, morals, the history of the universe, etc.), and maybe we can suggest various faiths that might jive with your worldview better than the one(s) you've tried thus far? you know, if that might be helpful....:)it's worth saying that not all christians have the idea that their god is the one god, or that they're worshipping something different from the islamic concept of allah or the jewish yaweh, etc. some do, some don't. i think this forum tends to pigeonhole and restrict its understanding of christianity a little bit sometimes, although i understand that it's largely because the sort of christianity espoused here is more often than not a bit fundamentalist.

So what are you getting at? That he should try gnosticism?

[HollywoodAFD 0]

cinci, why don't you talk some more about what it is you believe at this stage of your life (with respect to god, morals, the history of the universe, etc.), and maybe we can suggest various faiths that might jive with your worldview better than the one(s) you've tried thus far? you know, if that might be helpful....:)it's worth saying that not all christians have the idea that their god is the one god, or that they're worshipping something different from the islamic concept of allah or the jewish yaweh, etc. some do, some don't. i think this forum tends to pigeonhole and restrict its understanding of christianity a little bit sometimes, although i understand that it's largely because the sort of christianity espoused here is more often than not a bit fundamentalist.

That is very insightful.... very nice post. Your contributions to this thread are a pleasure to read. Have my babies.

[checkymcfold 0]

that's a nice ideal - if everyone thought that way these debates would be unnecessary and pointless. the trouble is most of the people in the world have been brainwashed since birth to have their worldview conform to their religion instead of the reverse, and that IS what is natural and meshes for them. they aren't capable of formulating a sensical worldview independant of their religious belief because their religious belief becomes deeply ingrained as part of their ego. that is why you end up with people who think it is logical, romantic etc to undermine science education for the sake of spreading their belief, fly planes into buildings etc.

fwiw, i feel as though i may have been brainwashed into agnosticism by the way my parents raised me. but that doesn't mean that i'm not agnostic of my own accord. people tend to be affected in very profound ways by their upbringing, but that doesn't mean that what they turned out to be isn't authentic or real. for instance, i've done a lot of work on nietzsche, who was brought up in a strictly lutheran family. although he radically distanced himself from christianity in his writings, i understand him to have developed his own worldview often as a stark contrast to the one offered by his heritage. zarathustra as the antichrist, etc. in any case, what i mean is that i understand nietzsche to have formulated his own worldview as a direct rebellion against his upbringing, and in that sense he owes as much to his lutheran family as he would if he became a preacher himself. but that doesn't mean that he doesn't believe what he believes--just because we can offer a psychological or anthropological account of someone's history vis-a-vis religion doesn't mean that their beliefs become fictitious or outright false thereby. we all have reasons for what we believe, and it's arrogant to value some of those reasons above others. my parents taught me to be who i am. nietzsche chose to rebel against what he was taught. someone like lois or hollywood may have learned something different from their upbringing. that's all totally fine, and on some level each of these are indistinguishable from one another. (i'm nearing the rambling stage, but meh.)this is part of what really bothers me about the arguments of richard dawkins, christopher hitchens, et al: the idea that atheists somehow hold this privileged place of free thinking that others can never aspire to as long as they belong to some form of organized religion. honestly, that's bullshit. atheism is different from fundamentalist religion in certain ways, yes, but to suggest that one can only think freely within an atheistic context is, uh, a little hypocritically closed minded. there are closed minded atheists just as much as there are closed minded religious practitioners. i think they're all equally retarded, personally.

[checkymcfold 0]

So what are you getting at? That he should try gnosticism?

haha, i dunno. i kinda have a degree in comparative religion (lacking the thesis part), so i might be able to help someone like cinci out if he's not sure what paths are out there for him. others may serve as similar resources. that's all i meant.i don't know shit about gnosticism, really, though, lol.

[TheCinciKid 0]

cinci, why don't you talk some more about what it is you believe at this stage of your life (with respect to god, morals, the history of the universe, etc.), and maybe we can suggest various faiths that might jive with your worldview better than the one(s) you've tried thus far? you know, if that might be helpful....:)it's worth saying that not all christians have the idea that their god is the one god, or that they're worshipping something different from the islamic concept of allah or the jewish yaweh, etc. some do, some don't. i think this forum tends to pigeonhole and restrict its understanding of christianity a little bit sometimes, although i understand that it's largely because the sort of christianity espoused here is more often than not a bit fundamentalist.

I appreciate your willingness to help checky. I really have very little idea where I'm at right now. As I said earlier in the thread, I was raised Traditional Catholic...meaning my parents and those around us adhered to the teachings and dogma of the Church pre-Vatican II, basically I was raised in the '50s. I was also home-schooled. I'm sure all of this shaped my worldview in a very profound way. When I got out into the world and started seeing all these diverse people, with differing viewpoints I started thinking that they can't all be going to hell just for not being Catholic (or for that matter Traditional Catholic like I was raised). Furthermore, I saw Catholicism as simply a religion of rules and fear. You do this and this and you don't do that or you're going to hell. I felt too constricted by what I saw as trivial rules like no masturbation or sex before marriage, eating fish on Fridays and having to tell your sins to the priest in order for them to be forgiven. I decided that Catholics were sheep and didn't know how to think for themselves. So, I threw the baby out with the bathwater and pretty much quit thinking about it for a few years (aside from a few minor tries like taking a World Religions class in college). I guess I've been thinking about religion more lately because I've recently reconnected with an old friend from my church growing up and I have another friend who's getting very close to becoming a priest. In a way, I want what religious people have...a certainty that what they're doing is right. I guess where I am right now is probably fairly close to agnosticism. Like you said in one of your posts, I think that I should try to be a good person and do the right thing, whether there's a God out there or not. I try to live my life as if it's not about heaven or hell, it's just about doing what's right. That said, for reasons I can't articulate very well, I do feel like it's more likely than not that there is some sort of God or higher power out there. To an extent that's probably largely a product of my upbringing and my background. If I were raised atheist maybe I'd think it more likely that there is no god. Finally, in spite of some of the things I pointed to in the second paragraph above as my reasons or excuses for leaving the Catholic Church, it does seem to make logical sense to me that if there is a God (leap of faith #1) and he does care about what we do here on earth with regards to an afterlife and all that (leap of faith #2), then he probably has ONE true faith, ONE true religion, ONE best/perfect way of reaching heaven. That's not to say that others CAN'T get there (I don't think I could ever think that) but those outside the true religion would be much less likely of reaching heaven. Again, I think this idea is probably colored by my background as a Catholic. I was taught growing up that the Catholic Church is the one true church and I don't really understand why, but the idea of there being a ONE TRUE Church makes the most sense to me. I guess the simplest way to put it would be this way. Either no religion is right, or only ONE is right. It doesn't seem like there can be multiple religions that have it right. That idea makes very little sense to me. Anyway, I guess that's some idea of where I am now. I'm sure some on here will try to rip me apart or explain to me why I'm wrong. I'm not going to try to defend myself. Frankly I'd never sat down and written it out like this and sometimes I think that's the best way to understand the ideas in your head. So, this gives me a greater understanding of where I am at the moment, but I'm not sure I hold anything written here to be canon truths (except of course the facts about my background ).

[TheCinciKid 0]

this is part of what really bothers me about the arguments of richard dawkins, christopher hitchens, et al: the idea that atheists somehow hold this privileged place of free thinking that others can never aspire to as long as they belong to some form of organized religion. honestly, that's bullshit. atheism is different from fundamentalist religion in certain ways, yes, but to suggest that one can only think freely within an atheistic context is, uh, a little hypocritically closed minded. there are closed minded atheists just as much as there are closed minded religious practitioners. i think they're all equally retarded, personally.

I just wanted to add. I like this paragraph alot. I haven't known much about atheism until very recently, but it has struck me that many atheists seem to be as closed minded as many people who are religious. They're just closed minded in the other direction. I don't particularly like either viewpoint.

[Swift_Psycho 1]

haha, i dunno. i kinda have a degree in comparative religion (lacking the thesis part), so i might be able to help someone like cinci out if he's not sure what paths are out there for him. others may serve as similar resources. that's all i meant.

Just out of curiosity, which religions do you have a firm grasp on?

[checkymcfold 0]

Just out of curiosity, which religions do you have a firm grasp on?

well, i wouldn't claim a "firm grasp" on any, since i'm not a practitioner myself, and a lot of my knowledge is historical rather than spiritual since i come from an academic background. but that said, i know the basic tenets of most contemporary, non-tribal faiths, and could probably fake being a follower of most sects of christianity, half the varieties of buddhism, non-orthodox judaism, or hinduism fairly well if i needed to .cinci, i'll write you a longer reply after i'm done with some tourneys.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

In a way, I want what religious people have...a certainty that what they're doing is right.

I understand what you're saying, because uncertainty is an uncomfortable feeling, but that kind of certainty is exactly how religion becomes murderous. Certainty that you're right is what leads people to murder OB/GYNs and fly planes into buildings.It's enough to be certain that you're living in a way that isn't harming others.Salon.com just published on Friday an excellent article saying that, for the sake of life on earth, we MUST become comfortable with religious uncertainty. It's well worth reading. Here's the link:http://www.salon.com/mwt/mind_reader/2008/02/29/certainty/

[crowTrobot 2]

fwiw, i feel as though i may have been brainwashed into agnosticism by the way my parents raised me. but that doesn't mean that i'm not agnostic of my own accord.

the trouble is being brainwashed renders you incapable of being objective about where your belief is coming from.

people tend to be affected in very profound ways by their upbringing, but that doesn't mean that what they turned out to be isn't authentic or real.

it obviously must in the vast majority of cases. otherwise religious belief wouldn't be so culturally biased.

we all have reasons for what we believe, and it's arrogant to value some of those reasons above others.

it's not arrogant to value objectivity over culturally forced conformation to primitive superstitious belief.

this is part of what really bothers me about the arguments of richard dawkins, christopher hitchens, et al: the idea that atheists somehow hold this privileged place of free thinking that others can never aspire to as long as they belong to some form of organized religion.

they say that because (most) organized religion is based in NOT ALLOWING free thinking lol.

honestly, that's bullshit. atheism is different from fundamentalist religion in certain ways, yes, but to suggest that one can only think freely within an atheistic context is, uh, a little hypocritically closed minded. there are closed minded atheists just as much as there are closed minded religious practitioners. i think they're all equally retarded, personally.

you seem just as confused as the OP about what atheism actually is.

[crowTrobot 2]

I just wanted to add. I like this paragraph alot. I haven't known much about atheism until very recently, but it has struck me that many atheists seem to be as closed minded as many people who are religious. They're just closed minded in the other direction.

please specifically define in what way you think atheists are being closed-minded.

[Swift_Psycho 1]

you seem just as confused as the OP about what atheism actually is.

I think checky's comment is addressing the kind of atheists who are so adamant in their disbelief in God that they would never be able to admit to God's existence even if there was at some point adequate evidence for his/her/its/their existence. I don't think he was addressing atheists as a whole.I could be wrong though.