Who else sees the religion/atheism debate as a non-issue?

reply to post by silent thunder


I have been saying this for so long. A belief belongs to the person who believes it and basically it is simply an opinion. You can't measure or quantify a belief. I enjoy a serious religious discussion, unfortunately, I've never seen one on this site.

I was raised Catholic and was very religious in my youth. I no longer believe in religion nor most of the stories. I don't deny anyone their right to believe what they wish.

I will say this, if it weren't for others expressing their thoughts, their beliefs and their logic, I would still be trapped in religion left with the nagging feeling that something is "wrong" and just doesn't "feel" right.

Before the internet, my only choices were asking questions of other Catholics or priests, whom didn't have any real answers, everything was "just have faith", "God works in mysterious ways" and anything that pulls you away from absolute belief was the work of the "Devil".

Personally, I don't believe it matters one iota if you believe or not. We're not on this earth for that. You can experience what you want here, any way you want, if religion is your "calling", then good for you, but most I suspect are only religious out of fear and a lifetime of brainwashing.

However, I could be wrong, but I doubt it. We're probably all right to a certain extent. Their are elements of religion I do believe in, but it's been perverted so badly over the years and to believe there is no afterlife to me is just as ridiculous.

In the end, I really don't think it matters what you believe. There will be no punishment for non-belief, but also no reward in that sense.

There are two basic types of religion. People of the first type were taught religion growing up and feel threatened by any ideas they experience in the real world which contradict their beliefs, as to take any such ideas seriously would threaten to remove all meaning from life and/or bring them under the threat of divine wrath. It is this type that constitutes most of the religious side in religious/atheist flamewars.

The other type is those who have had an ineffable personal experience of the divine. You will never shake the faith of these people, and they do not feel threatened by the opinions of others. If they take part in these discussions, it's usually not as flamers but as clarifiers. Call it "spiritual" if you wish but in many cases these experiences have strong undercurrents of a major religion.

I agree that most of the time, what is being argued is a non-issue. I, however, disagree about religion/non-religion being a non-issue, if only the debate remained on topic. The issue is the practices, the behaviors of both sides and these practices of group behaviors begin with individual beliefs, regardless of the origin.

Religion (a cultural practice governing individual behaviors defined by a group consensus) and spirituality (belief in a higher power/god/deity/self that weighs in on an individual's decision making) are not the same thing. One is post and the other is pre. Most of the arguments I took part in always end up with the chicken/egg argument that turns into non-argument tactics.

The religion vs atheism debate you claim as being a non-issue is complicated. Beliefs produce actions; actions produce results; results produce beliefs; beliefs produce judgments; and then judgments produce arguments. Arguments are supposed to be intellectual debates but they seldom stay on topic.

Here is an interesting event that happened in my life: I took an economics class and we were debating whether social welfare and capitalism can co-exist. A young woman started her debate, "I feel" and was immediately cut off by the professor, "Next!" After the debate, a fellow student asked why the young woman was cut off and the professor explained to the class that we cannot argue feelings because feelings define who we are and the debate was not about who we are, it was about what we practice that works or doesn't.

The next time you or I dabble in the religious forum, I think it wise to remember my professor's words. The debate should never be about who we are because individuality should never be judged. The debate should be about what we do that produces negative and positive results.

They are dividing man into ingredients for world alchemy.

We must not let these soulless bastards corrupt further, the fruit of man. It is a slow conquering, we are lain waste to by the wolfs of war and ghosts of ideology, only communication and the disrobing of societal garments can save man from his absolute enslavement.

we all pass, we must leave the correct path for the new ones, the children who are enslaved every minute, with every birth.

Thinking the thoughts of others we forget who we are.

Religious people are such for the positives it brings their lives, atheists are such because of the positives it brings their lives.

Let us see that we have things in common, specifically being, we all hope for the best. Let us all be friends. Any one who makes trouble for the sake of his god is in fact, his own god.

peace,

reply to post by silent thunder


If the religion/atheist debate is meaningless or a non-issue, then what about all the other debates? Are they also non-issues? If not, what's the difference between other debates and one based on religious beliefs? Just curious why you think this particular debate is useless above the others.

I don't debate religion or atheism. I may give my two cents when I think someone is misunderstanding something or just to interject my opinion, as I am here. But I don't put believers down or try to prove I'm right or prove they're wrong. THAT is a pointless effort, IMO.

I support freedom of religion and understand that it plays an important part in some people's lives. As long as it's not imposed upon me, I FULLY support the individual's practice of the religion they choose, or of none at all.

Is it a non-issue? Not to a LOT of people.

The arguments I have are not to get people to believe but to get them to use good logic in their belief or to not use false arguments.

It is like pulling teeth though. Have a theist tell you "God says a circle has 3 even sides." You tell them "Not possible cause that is called a triangle." And they get all crazy saying it is true and I cannot know how many sides "gods" circle has! Stop being arrogant about that and you are evil!"



It is too funny and sad at the same time.

Originally posted by c g henderson
I have yet to come across a religious type on ATS that is even remotely interested in understanding atheists.

You have now. I am a religious type, and I'm very interested in talking to and understanding atheists, agnostics and others who don't share my beliefs. Why? Because when I listen to their concerns, it helps me to critically think about different aspects of my faith that I often don't consider, and doing that helps my faith grow stronger.

Beyond that, I'm not interested in converting them, though I will correct misstatements about my faith or answer questions about it.

reply to post by adjensen


I am of the opinion that what is god is not of an entity at all . It might be the feeling of what we call the "soul" instructing us on an evolutionary basis what is needed for survival .

QUESTION: Who starts most of the Religion vs Atheist threads? The Religious or the Atheists?

And - when someone starts a "shouldn't have these threads" - - is it mostly the Religious or the Atheists?

Originally posted by silent thunder

somehow it just doesn't strike me as all that important.

That could be used as a quote in relation to the subject of the argument for and against.

I think that those from both sides who are so bitterly vocal about the subject that they fail to understand one fundamental thing and this is that they both believe. One subscribes to the theory that there is no god and the other subscribes to the theory that there is one.

The real question someone who is so deeply embedded into the argument should ask is why do they bother, what is to be gained and who really benefits when arguments of such passion spiral into rage and outright animosity? One could be forgiven for thinking that a life is not complete unless someone is scoring points off someone, beating someone about the head with a soggy opinion until the opinion is forgotten but the act of anger is not.

The so called contemporary debates that get started these days are the very same debates that got started ten and twenty years ago and the same answers were countered with the same retorts, the same bad feelings grew from the same consequences of similar insults being thrown around. The argument will never be won by either side because there is no proof either way as all one can call on to back up their own side is their own reality born on subjective and personal wings. That is why the argument rages on, gathering new recruits to the eternal flame war.

I say accept the other; get over the fundamentals regarding the fences both sides sit upon and just get on with the real issues which have all to do with the rape of earth by the few rather than to theology as practiced by so many.

Love your god if you must because he loves you back but you have no right to try to brow beat another because they do not believe as you do, and atheists you do yourself no favours and you do not cover yourself in glory when you insult the person who loves a god you believe does not exist.

Respect is to accept another’s choice not to try and wreck their dream in my view.

What is god? What is love? Why is it easier to get with hate than to get with love? Perhaps hate in this age is seen as coming from strength whereas love is seen as coming from a place of weakness. Flip it all on its head and there is the skeletal framework from which our much sought of paradigm shift and our beloved holy grail, the global awakening, the consciousness shift could grow from. However, sadly this will never come until we as a people cease and desist with the negativity regarding each other’s choices.

I am with you OP, I have always been right there from my teenage years thinking it was totally irrelevant and pointless. However perhaps not totally pointless because we get to see the real agendas behind those who come and instead of giving us their own opinion they will instead copy and paste scripture. The militant atheist will then pour scorn on the whole thing and those of us who wish to look deeper than simply to point scoring know from then on what to expect from such members in future so perhaps – useful after all?

In my humble opinion, It all stopped being important the moment we stopped looking for god in a book and started looking for god in the sub atomic particle, within ourselves... We are all god, we are none of us gods!


[edit on 26-7-2010 by SmokeJaguar67]

Originally posted by Annee
QUESTION: Who starts most of the Religion vs Atheist threads? The Religious or the Atheists?

And - when someone starts a "shouldn't have these threads" - - is it mostly the Religious or the Atheists?

I wonder if there are more atheists and agnostics now vs a few hundred years ago? If so, could education or ease of communication be driving it? I wonder what the numbers will look like in a hundred years ...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c6211adbf40d.jpg[/atsimg]

Do I have to say anymore?

[edit on 26-7-2010 by Maddogkull]

Originally posted by silent thunder

the religion-versus-athiesm debate seems ridiculous and tautological to me somehow. In other words, it seems like a kind of non-issue.

i agree, this reminds me of another thread talking about suicide being illegal or not, just like that issue it is futile and pointless, whether its illegal or not people will still kill themselves and they cant be punished or fined once their dead,

theres no point in believeing a religion or not, its realy quite simple be nice in life or not, either way is your choice and whether you believe in after death consequences or not wont change your decision of how to act,

and it seems no one is realy going to know until their dead so save that question for the last one of your life since its the one that you can be sure no one can completly answer,

Originally posted by Paschar0

Originally posted by Annee
QUESTION: Who starts most of the Religion vs Atheist threads? The Religious or the Atheists?

And - when someone starts a "shouldn't have these threads" - - is it mostly the Religious or the Atheists?

I wonder if there are more atheists and agnostics now vs a few hundred years ago? If so, could education or ease of communication be driving it? I wonder what the numbers will look like in a hundred years ...

I think people tend to be more honest - outspoken - and upfront today vs a few hundred years ago.

However - even today how many Atheist politicians are there? If you were applying for a job - would you volunteer you are an Atheist? (Yes - I know they can't ask).

There is still a HUGE "God Force" in America. Life's tough enough. I know I'm not gonna volunteer anything that could fall on me like a sledge hammer. So - I think there are plenty of silent non-believers.

I also think many people are just lazy god believers. They were assimilated into a god belief - - and don't really question it one way or the other.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by c g henderson
I have yet to come across a religious type on ATS that is even remotely interested in understanding atheists.

You have now. I am a religious type, and I'm very interested in talking to and understanding atheists, agnostics and others who don't share my beliefs. Why? Because when I listen to their concerns, it helps me to critically think about different aspects of my faith that I often don't consider, and doing that helps my faith grow stronger.

Then it is really nice to come across you. I have been watching ATS for a long time and was a member way back when. I know people like you but I never see them here. Perhaps we can have a nice chat in one of the already running but useless threads about this particular debate sometime.

Beyond that, I'm not interested in converting them, though I will correct misstatements about my faith or answer questions about it.

Even better. I see a lot of that used as a defense. People afraid the other side is just looking to convert. I would love to just have a nice normal conversation like any people discussing two different ideas on the topic. I have no desire to change anyone else belief on anything. Well, almost anything. My sister's kid love Justin Bieber and I am looking to change that.

[edit on 26-7-2010 by c g henderson]

i do.

for two groups that can't seem to get along, they sure do have a lot in common.

it's like two people that are so much alike they hate each other. they share a house and are codependent upon each other for the sake of making their arguments seem valid. which doesn't really promote spirituality or logic.

both are seeking possible realities. both are searching for truth. along the same road, traveling in separate lanes, going opposite directions, heading for a singular destination. what IS.







[edit on 26/7/2010 by gravykraken]

Science and faith are the twin gauntlets of able realization.

Originally posted by gravykraken
i do.

for two groups that can't seem to get along, they sure do have a lot in common.

it's like two people that are so much alike they hate each other. they share a house and are codependent upon each other for the sake of making their arguments seem valid. which doesn't really promote spirituality or logic.

both are seeking possible realities. both are searching for truth. along the same road, traveling in separate lanes, going opposite directions, heading for a singular destination. what IS.

I don't see it that way - and I don't think most Atheist do either.

What exactly would Atheists be searching for?

Most of these God vs Atheist threads are started by God believers challenging Atheists.

God believers get all emotional.

Atheists attempt to stay and respond (rather flatly) with logic.

Then the emotional God believers claim the discussion is a waste of time.

I absolutly refuse to violently disagree. What would you think if I said I agree.
Well I don't. I think our origins are very important. What is it that leaves us with no memory of hence we came? Where are we going? What is our
true purpose? We don't have a clue.
It's not so much religion for me, as it is the truth. I think truth, is the most important thing over all, since you must agree, there can be only one truth.
Another thing, people need to keep in mind is, that religious text of any kind. From deep in the past. Don't just hold religious value. At the very
least they are all of great literary importance.
There is much at stake in these debates I believe. Acceptable ideas and so on. If it isn't important to you, to know the one truth, that awaits us all.
Or to believe in your ideas, as you understand what you believe is truth. Nothing can make you click on that thread but you partner.

Free will.