Long ago, now back.
Hello, everyone. I just wanted to introduce myself.
First, I consider myself an atheist for mixed reasons.
1. It's not necessarily because I refuse to believe the ridiculous idea that all of the universe was created by a bearded man in the clouds with the snap of his fingers within 7 days (I know, I know - that is WAY oversimplified in terms of the actual Genesis story. So please stop your complaining before you begin, you Theists). I suppose, it's because I refuse to believe that the existence of "God" is based solely on faith... Faith? Believing in an idea without having concrete and measurable evidence to support the concept? I can't accept that. Therefore, I suppose I really seek to understand what drives people to believe in higher beings such as God. It can't be mere "faith." I mean, I'm almost bewildered when I'm faced with someone will just blindly follow path of "faith" without a logical explanation.
2. I don't see how people, in 2012, can truly believe that religious texts were written for our generation. Understandably, the Bible as a piece of literature provides great moral guidance and forewarning to those of us who, regardless of beliefs, want to do well for others. "Don't kill other people," "Don't sleep with someone else's wife or husband," "Don't dishonor your family or your parents," "Don't say anything in vain, that you also don't mean" are all great tips for living a very respectful life. However, when it comes to subjects such as "don't eat clove-hooved animals," "don't sleep with the same gender," "don't wear garments made of two different materials," "don't all provide guidance for the people of that time. They do not apply to us today. Statements such as "don't sleep with the same gender" go hand-in-hand with not using contraception. Back then, it was even an "abomination" to use coitis interruptus as a method of contraception because the goal of the state was to reproduce. You cannot reproduce with the same gender, and therefore it is also an "abomination." That's just one example, IMHO.
3. Regardless of the inredible evidence to the contrary, God fearing men and women still think that their faith trumps or logically debunks what has been proven through n'th number of years of scientific scrutiny. Easiest example: evolutionism vs young earth creationism. The only idea I can see that might support some weight in the young earth creation theory is that sedentarization began roughly around 12,000 BCE. Who knows? Maybe young earth creationist don't even know what they're talking about, and when they reference the bible that explains all of this, the bible is really refering to the onset of civilization. I'm not sure. Either way, it frustrates me how incredibly ridiculous some ideas are, and how incredibly stubborn New-Age Christians can be when presented with PROVEN facts.
I don't claim to have infinite amounts of knowledge toward either argument between Theism and Atheism. However, I did come here to find out. I don't think that I will ever become a Theist, but I do think and hope that I may come to understand and respect them more.
Tell 'em that God's gunna cut you down.
- Login to post comments
I made a typo. In the second bullet, I put "don't all...
What I meant to say was: "All provide guidence for people of that time"
Tell 'em that God's gunna cut you down.
Welcome back. I am new here, but I am a long time atheist and recovered christian. I am also fascinated how humans
can take something solely on faith and devote their entire lives to it, but being a former christian I do understand them.
And the more I understand them the less I respect christianity. In fact I don't respect it at all. I feel pity for anyone who
is living under it's yoke. The good lessons you speak of in the bible are just natural common sense to a reasonable
person. They were just put in there to mask the underhandedness of it's true purpose. Think about it. What better
weapon to bestow upon your enemy's than a manual to live by that teaches them things like "Give all you have to
the poor" and "turn your other cheek to your enemy when he smites you". The entire book is a scam meant to make
people set aside all reason. I may sound bitter but I was one of their victims. that is why I am here.
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
A couple of recent articles I found on google written on Richard Dawkins recent debate with a prominent "man of the cloth", in the titles of the stories said something to the affect of "Dawkins admits to being agnostic".
But that is cherry picking on their part. Dawkins is an atheist, and from what I read from your OP you are too.
"I don't know" does not mean you have to let your brains fall out and swallow myth.
When believers try to catch the atheist with "AH HA, you admit to not knowing" as meaning "you really are not an atheist" is a patiently bullshit argument.
When Dawkins admits "I don't know" he is only and strictly talking about the fact that probability cant technically reach absolute certainty.
The reaction believers have to the atheist's admission "I don't know" is like the scene in Dumb and Dumber when Jim Carry finally meets the women he is pining for and she says "Your chances are one in a billion"
And he responds "So you're saying there's a chance"
You are an atheist, and so is Dawkins and so am I. Not knowing what the future will bring as far as human discovery does not mean we have to be stupid as a species and cling to the past. Theist conflate our admission to "I don't know" as a 50/50 proposition.
"agnostic" was a word Thomas Huxley WRONGFULLY cobbled together as meaning fence sitter,
But in it's literal prefix and suffix "a" meaning "without", and "gnostic" meaning "knowledge" the word does not refer to a position.
You have your absolute believers who claim Allah or Jesus or Vishnu, they are Theists
Then you have agnostic theists who say "I don't know, but I believe there is something there" are agnostic theists.
But "agnostic" since it is a word describing knowledge, and not position, can also apply to the word atheist.
An agnostic atheist is one who says "we cannot know the future" but at this moment all the evidence points to a god not existing.
I am both an agnostic atheist and an outright atheist.
I strictly from a very technical and semantic sense am "agnostic" about the future. The thought of everything coming from a cognition without an evolutionary brain is ABSURD. It is only technical in the sense that I have not lived the future.
But I am an outright atheist as far as past and present and current claims of deities/gods/supernatural.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog