It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Not atheist, not religious: Typical Briton is a 'fuzzy believer'

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
That doesn't surprise me. I would say 40% of young Americans have similar fuzzy beliefs.

Like me, I'm a Christian but I don't consider myself religious or go to Church or even believe in Heaven and Hell.




posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by The Djin
 



So, these "Skeptics" and "atheists" that are no longer skeptics and atheists because you've presented them with your case which claim is absolute truth. This has what to do with the invisible crucified man in the sky that Brits overwhelmingly reject exactly ?

I never said anything nor did I yet get to your proverbial "invisi-cruci-man-sky" ...this is the problem with debates on message boards ...there is too much room to jump the gun with assumptions.


If you are somehow claiming that these people are now christians then say so, how on earth you move from not believing the mythology of the bibles to accepting them as some portal to absolute truth is quite an achievement . I would love to hear their stories of how you guided them to the truth of the godman that never was..

jumped the gun again ...I said I have convinced former atheists to at least be agnostics and some theists ...that's still quite a ways off from being Christian .....but leaves room for flexibility.


Why is it do you think, that you were so successful at leading your atheist friends down the path of truth and enlightenment yet fail miserably when you attempt to engage in the same process here on ATS ?

its all about dynamics. there is too much room and time in between posts for folks to jump the gun and assume. Walk into a Uni wearing a suite like everyone else, speaking the same vernacular and rich vocabulary as your peers, eye contact, hands shaken, and there is a level of mutual respect and equalized debate. That just doesn't exist here.


It hurt like funking hell when someone roasts you to death for not wanting to partake in their delusion, now that is absolute truth

its all relative. One day the Christians will be out numbered by other groups and they will be hurting. The ebbs and tides of change. Still your relative subjective hurt is far far away from any sort of Absolute truth.


You don't half get up your own arse and talk bollocks, do you happen to have a degree in bollocks by any chance ? Atheism is a point of view how can not believing something even remotely equate to being a religion, atheism has no content nor dogma.

great debate technique mate, bring the word "bollocks" into it .... Atheism is a religion, you guys dont believe in anything, have no Dogma, but that is your content ...the content of no belief and no Dogma. It is certainly and organized and structured belief system. Basically you believe there is no God and believe all religions are shams. Obviously you can't say you know this to be true because you can't prove it, so your only outcome is to admit that thus far you believe there to be no God.


They really let you inside a university ? Christian funded ?

When one has self control, friends, and doesn't have to revert to the term "bollocks" then you'd be surprised what inner circles you can get into. No none of these have been Christian funded and many have taken place privately in homes of Professors, Library conference rooms, cafes, on campus during lunch breaks, etc.
_____________________________
In Reply to Titen Sxull:


It's a big jump from: Logic and Reason are limited to: therefore there is a God. Of course logic and reason are limited, to suggest otherwise would be asinine. But they are certainly the best methods we have for determining what is real. Rational thinking trumps superstitious thinking every time.

again jumped the gun. I never go directly from "logic & reason are limited" to "that = God." Its one of many practical systematic Socratic methods to break down a stance into its lowest bottom denominator. What eventually happens is at least the possibility in Atheists defense to consider the possibility of something else. Whether you want to use the word God or Spaghetti monster does not matter to me. What matters is to see your own stance as relative and as having foundations built on sand. Then a cool change in perspective takes place.

You also mention superstition, just like when someone once mentioned the possibility of a horseless carriage (i.e. engine locomotion) was scolded as a superstitious blasphemer back in the 18th century. This brings to the field semantics and the question of time. Many facts of this day were once considered superstitious like internet, airplanes, and cars lets hope this is kept in mind if we are to debate each other or better yet just leave it out all together since the foundations of superstition just carry no weight what so ever.

Plus "rational thinking" changes with time and with new discoveries. What was rational 500 years ago is like a joke to us today, same thing goes for what we know today. Therefor its all relative.


A personal anecdotal experience cannot be considered evidence to another individual.

Why not? To some its not and to others it. And if one tells another, he go and meditate for 10 hours a day for 3 years and tell me what you find, and they find God ...then we are still gonna say that's not evidence? And what if 100 people are told this and they all find God? This is still not evidence?


If it were the case that someone else's experience of God proved God than people's experiences of fairies, pixies, mermaids, elves, Zeus, Thor and ALIENS would all count as proof as well. Surely you don't believe in all that

First we dont have groups of people all over the world through-out history describing these beings Universally. But we do have descriptions of an after life and God. Big difference.


By the way before I was an atheist I was a fundamentalist Christian... you might say I experienced God, I could even speak in tongues (in fact I still can).

Ok but that's relative. You very well could have been in a church that was all hypnotic suggestion including the tongues. I can take any man of the street and teach them how to do sub-conscious freestyle murmuring and pass it off as speaking in tongues which is something many of these hypno-Churches do. I used to go to a few of them in my youth and became an Atheist just like you are now. But upon further investigation and debates, it was illogical to be an Atheist when I got destroyed in a debate by Ravi Zacharias (google him if you get a chance).

After that came things like remembering a pre-existence and experiencing faculties beyond logic and reason and finding that there are maybe 2 to 3 people out of a hundred on average who experience these additional faculties.

But thats neither here or there. Most of the Brits that have been atheists that I have spoken to have had MASSIVE egos, some of the biggest I have ever encounter and I have friends all across the states, Italy, Spain, Poland, Russian, etc. Just an observation. Perhaps there is a connection there.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


Numerous privacy cases have invoked sections of the Bill of Rights 1689 - A Tory MP was the example I used from 1993. The reason why Damien Green never went to court, over leaking government information, was Article 9 of the Bill of Rights. EU Carbon Tax or any direct European taxes is unconstitutional in the United Kingdom, because under the Bill of Rights, only Parliament has the authority to raise taxation.

Secondly, under the Human Rights Act, Britain is not a Christianity country because the European Convention of Human Rights (which the Act is based on) prevents any State from being bias towards any religion.

You, and others, clearly do not understand the uncoded Constitution of the United Kingdom. As
Parallex
has stated, Parliament is sovereign under the Bill of Rights 1689 and Act of Succession - Parliament can refuse to acknowledge an heir and elect someone else i.e see William of Orange. The power does not rest within the Monarch. Parliament is the highest authority of the United Kingdom.

As for your argument, if Christianity is not mandatory in the United Kingdom, how can we be an official Christian country?



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Parallex
 


I would argue scapegoating needs to be stopped.
Like scapegoating a concept called religion as a cause for human inequity and human nastiness.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by dominicus
 


Could you start a new thread setting out your argument for there being a god/afterlife? I'd be very interested to read it but I don't think it's fair to derail this thread.

Cheers.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Rustami
 


Long live the divine Mango!, down with the evil Bananists and their phallic god!

The road of banana is the road to hell, only through our lord Mango can we achieve fruity Nirvana.

Mangists forever!



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by dominicus
 





great debate technique mate, bring the word "bollocks" into it
....

Indeed, bollocks is a great word used great deal in the UK I learned if from my Dad who didn't put on blazer and autograph hunt the self promoted but had an uncanny knack for spotting ludicrous assertions.






Atheism is a religion, you guys dont believe in anything, have no Dogma, but that is your content ...the content of no belief and no Dogma. It is certainly and organized and structured belief system.



Again , this is completely incorrect which you're obviously smart enough to know (ie talking bollocks) if your reasoning is correct then not believing in the existence of leprechauns etc and fairies are religions.

Where exactly do you observe the organization and structure in not believing something my friend ? Even if atheists became organized and structured this would be just a group of people who happen not to believe something, rubbing shoulders in an organized and structured manner for whatever reason with whatever goals.







Basically you believe there is no God and believe all religions are shams.


This may or not be the case but would only apply to me as it is me you are now talking to, but there is no commitment, no faith, no devotion, no conformity, no worship , no dogma, no deity, no institution, nor beliefs, no intention, no goals.







Obviously you can't say you know this to be true because you can't prove it, so your only outcome is to admit that thus far you believe there to be no God.


No my friend, I observe there is no evidence of a particular deity and therefore am not persuaded of its' existence without evidence of such, I therefore do not believe it. So, for example there is no evidence that would prove the existence of Thor and if I lived in the land of Thorans I would be labeled an Atheist.

Equally so, if you also happen not to believe in the reality of Thor like me then we would both be atheists, so according to your reasoning we are now a religion purely because we happen to not believe something ?


Dude, I do not believe there is a magik horse ridden by a fairy orbiting the sun, I cannot prove there is not, but as no one has provided the evidence proving that there is, then I sensibly do not choose to believe that there is.

Should millions of other people happen to not believe the very same thing as I happen not to believe ( a logical outcome) how the hell is this a religion ?

Yes indeed my friend, my Dad never had patches on his elbows but he knew bollocks when heard it and fortunately a little rubbed off on me.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 





Secondly, under the Human Rights Act, Britain is not a Christianity country because the European Convention of Human Rights (which the Act is based on) prevents any State from being bias towards any religion.


This is the case I've been arguing with my Local Education Authority, where christians have infiltrated the education system and use their positions to indoctrinate children with their delusion. At this time they have a captured audience with the young minds of "Fuzzie Believers" but as the pews are emptying and the churches turned into Off Licensees and charity shops so is their grip weakening.

Unfortunately it would seem as though we have another group in positions of influence who would take advantage of this state of affairs and attempt to create acrimony by manipulating other religious groups that are traditionally the enemy of Christianity. Perhaps the agenda is so vile as to go as far as bombing tune stations and buses and blame religious fanatics.


There is much to be said about an ardent secular society at the very least it could protect us all including the rights of individuals to have their own faiths.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   
I think people are 'fuzzy' on religion for the simple reason that in this day and age, with all the technology and science taking over our day to day lives, that religion is looking more and more like an out of date concept for the more gullible members of society. Science and its way of thinking means that you need proof of things. This is also shown in law. You have to be proven guilty to end up in jail for example. Religion relies on blind faith in many cases, and is based on books which seem more like fairy tail stories then a book of fact.
In the end people look at the evidence and think, its not true, so they won't believe it. Religion relies on belief and with science and the modern ages eroding this belief, people turn to atheism or get caught in between facts and those things you can't explain that religion says are because of god/Allah/*insert deity here*.
I think the term Agnostic describes many of these people who are 'fuzzy' when it comes to religion. Being brought up by their parents under a religious blanket as well adds to their uncertainty as their parents religion is burnt into their minds at a young age, but as they get older common sense and science confuses the situation. Many too will see the wars of the world now and in history and see, and rightly so, that religion is a main reason for such unrest.
In the end, they will believe in a god, but nothing else. Probably not a bad thing really.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Parallex
 


im british

im atheist

thers only one good thing the bible does and thats give people a good idea of how we should live. (be nice to people share dont kill respect the earth)

other than that everything else in that dam book is BS



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Silicis n Volvo
 





thers only one good thing the bible does and thats give people a good idea of how we should live. (be nice to people share dont kill respect the earth)


Perhaps that's stretching it a bit because you have to cherry pick through the abhorrent way off living to find a "good bit" which are nothing original .

So it basically goes - " It is smart if we forgive and try to get along" (which is common sense) in order to do this believe there's an invisible man that lives in the sky who will torture you if you don't knowledge it was his idea to get along. You can choose not to get along and kill each other but when you do it make sure you believe the invisible man in the sky is giving you the authority to do it or you will be killed for not giving him credit.

No good can ever ultimately come from a bible my friend they have far too much bad attached to them, we've had quite a few thousand years and some charity work, a bit of fine art and architecture sprinkled with the odd beautiful tune to figure that one out.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


Good god I'm feeling sorry for Mr Holmes at this point. I have seen him state perfectly clearly several times that Britian being a Christian country DOES NOT mean that everyone living in the country has to be.

It is the STATE that is a christian country, because the head of the state is also the head of the church. The citizens of the country can be what they want.

The president of Ford is a car man, he loves cars. Ford is a car company, but some of its employees travel by bus. Get it?





edit on 11-9-2010 by waynos because: And I am an atheist - religion is a dangerous fairytale IMO



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by dominicus
 


If the Djin jumped the gun, it was but a small step compared to the jump, or should that be transatlantic flight, relatively speaking, that takes one from the limitation of logic to the existence of god.


One day the Christians will be out numbered by other groups and they will be hurting.


Quite possibly, which just reinforces my view that organised religion is the biggest travesty ever perpetrated on the Human race. ALL of them. If everyone truly believes there is ONE god, what the hell are they all arguing about?


Atheism is a religion, you guys dont believe in anything, have no Dogma, but that is your content ...the content of no belief and no Dogma. It is certainly and organized and structured belief system. Basically you believe there is no God and believe all religions are shams.


Careful with that straw, it may break.

What organisation and structure? I believe in right and wrong and good and evil, and living life for the best. not deities and angels. I am fine that people think differently to me and will not be burning anyone at the stake or beheading them at any point in the near future. I don't need someone in a funny costume to rant at me on a weekly basis to keep me in line, thank you.


But thats neither here or there. Most of the Brits that have been atheists that I have spoken to have had MASSIVE egos, some of the biggest I have ever encounter and I have friends all across the states, Italy, Spain, Poland, Russian, etc. Just an observation. Perhaps there is a connection there.


Or, maybe, they thought the same about you?



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jazz10
Could it not be possible that we are of extra terrestrial origins and somehow we have been supressed in more ways than one.
Now I'm a firm believer in what the bible says and more to where I believe it points to our origins whom we call ET's. I believe that we are decendants of Jesus, jesus of god etc. Someone or something helped us all along. That's the only plausable explanation
ET or god created us all. I think they are one and the same.


Well actually there is a lot of evidence pointing out to the fact that humans are the Genetic Hybrids of the Alien race known as the 'Annunaki'. The more I read into this info the more it begins to make sense.

As far as God is concerned the evidence points to the fact that God and Jesus don't and have never existed. The Islamic faith is based on Chritianity with some tweaking in the story lines. The bible it seems was written by the romans to control the people. All these religions are all based on the same BS control tool!

I live in Scotland and I'm not shy when it comes to saying I'm an aethiest! Believers are just plain and simply looking for hope and guidance in their lives. Aethiests know the truth and just get on with their lives!!



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by stevcolx
 


I find it strange that you used the words 'evidence' and 'fact' when discussing humanity and the Annunaki.

Also, Jesus was a historical person, he is KNOWN to have lived and is recorded as being executed by crucifixion. You seem to be having trouble separating myth and reality here.

As for whether he was the son of god? I just think he was a very clever bloke - who then got caught by the authorities, mythology then ensued.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by dominicus
 


It's hard to believe that you've stumped anyone intellectually in a god vs no god argument. Religion and the concept of an afterlife are unarguably man-made because we are are all simply human and need reassurance that we will one day be with our dead ancestors.

I'm classified as agnostic because I believe there is a phenomenon that is beyond DNA that drives cellular reproduction resulting in the existence of you and me, whether its divine or a universal law like gravity is impossible to confirm.

The afterlife cannot be anything like what you are thinking it to be,where you have a blasty blast with you and your friends, which is the usual picture most people think of - Heaven(like). However much so I want there to be a place where me and my family that passes away goes to reunite, I know that just like Santa, that place simply cannot exist.

Lets do some simple thinking to back this idea. There is a time before you were born, and there will be a time after you die. We did not choose to be born on planet earth in this time or place, we just were. Did your energy just hang around for est. 14 billion years then decide to become a humanoid on this planet, or have you been reliving life cycles constantly over and over again like a song stuck on repeat? You don't remember what happened to you BEFORE you were born, but we can guess can't we? Which I think is how religion was founded to begin with. So does this all not paint a gloomy picture?

Religion, sadly for people like yourself, dies off quickly as just another "How-To" book on life/afterlife that one group of people uses to control another group of people, simple as that friend.

Like a certain movie, If there was no such thing as the ability to tell a person a lie, do you think there would be religion?



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by stevcolx
 


I find it strange that you used the words 'evidence' and 'fact' when discussing humanity and the Annunaki.

Also, Jesus was a historical person, he is KNOWN to have lived and is recorded as being executed by crucifixion. You seem to be having trouble separating myth and reality here.

As for whether he was the son of god? I just think he was a very clever bloke - who then got caught by the authorities, mythology then ensued.


Actually Jesus is not recorded in history. Not one of the historians of that era has ever mentioned a guy called Jesus. So I don't know where you got that info from.

As far as the Annunaki are concerned you just have to look at the ancient writings and carvings of the Egyptians, Zulu's, Mayans, Aborigionies, Himalayans, American Indians etc They all detail their star gods (Annunaki) and tell of their influence in the creation of mankind.


edit on 11/9/2010 by stevcolx because: Bad grammar



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Personally, I believe in God and an afterlife, but not any organized religion, and call myself a Deist or Unitarian. Atheists are too strident and militant for me, always trying to prove their point, while I think organized religion has mostly a negative influence on people. This is especially true of fundamentalists and fanatics, whether Christian, Muslim or whatever else. To my mind, religions are like a big business, and are really all about money, control and power.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   
As a Deist, I certainly think science has its place in explaining the universe and has done a great deal to improve life on earth in many areas, from health care to communications, but let's not forget that it serves various paymasters as well, from big corporations to the military and intelligence organizations. (Never forget MK Ultra, and the development of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, etc, etc.) So while I respect science, I am also very skeptical and leery of it at the same time.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by stevcolx
 





Actually Jesus is not recorded in history.

Well you have to be a little more careful there, jesus was most defiantly recorded historically, the problem being that there were many jesusesss (what's the plural, jesi ? lol) recorded but apparently they (according to xtianity) did not have the same attributes as the one that briefly popped up in the bibles.

A good example being the Jesus that resides at Talpiot, this one the xtians have put a great effort into dissociating with the NT jesus.

Yes indeed, jesi (lol) were ten a penny in the first century and messiahs were dripping from the temple walls, in a nutshell plenty of jesi but they don't want a "real" one.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join