How many of you guys are religious?

Printable View

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-20-2010, 08:51 PM
nina

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

So this atheist dies and comes back as a Christian.
The is the most profound Joke I've ever told, shame you won't get it.

Are you suggesting that Christians are Demons?
12-20-2010, 08:56 PM
Xei

GOOD LORD the cheeky devil WROTE IT IN WHITE.

Marvellous.
12-20-2010, 09:47 PM
Snowboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xei

GOOD LORD the cheeky devil WROTE IT IN WHITE.

Marvellous.

:clap:

I was wondering what was up with that, too. :P

Also, I thought this wasn't a discussion thread. Why is there discussion?
12-20-2010, 11:40 PM
Wantless

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xei

I would mind.

I'm not saying it does work.

I'm saying that it does not necessitate God. You are the one making this claim so I am asking you to defend it.

It is patent that some things just are. For example, gravity pulls things down. This is the way nature is. There is no need to hypothesise a God being which pulls something down whenever it is dropped. It is totally superfluous; either God just is, and God makes gravity, or gravity just is.

In the same way, if we assume that reincarnation is possible (which I do not), there is no reason that it cannot 'just be', rather than there being a superfluous conscious being performing exactly the same action behind the scenes; unless you can show that any mechanism of reincarnation would necessarily necessitate such a being.

I wasn't trying to make reincarnation require God. I just don't see it how some atheists don't believe in God unless they have proof but can some can believe in reincarnation which in also can't be explain.
12-21-2010, 12:13 AM
Malac Reborn

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wantless

I wasn't trying to make reincarnation require God. I just don't see it how some atheists don't believe in God unless they have proof but can some can believe in reincarnation which in also can't be explain.

People just work like that. Accept it. Just think of your situation , in how you believe there is God, but won't accept that good ole Saint Nick exist.
12-21-2010, 12:14 AM
Wantless

Quote:

Originally Posted by malac

People just work like that. Accept it.

Fine work for me.
12-21-2010, 01:44 AM
Descensus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wantless

I wasn't trying to make reincarnation require God. I just don't see it how some atheists don't believe in God unless they have proof but can some can believe in reincarnation which in also can't be explain.

Precisely why I myself don't believe in reincarnation and see atheists who do as inconsistent, specifically if they use the "no evidence" argument all the time.
12-21-2010, 02:22 AM
Xei

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wantless

I wasn't trying to make reincarnation require God. I just don't see it how some atheists don't believe in God unless they have proof but can some can believe in reincarnation which in also can't be explain.

If you think about this properly you'll realise it doesn't make sense. You're assuming God is a given which people must use scepticism to actively reject, whereas reincarnation is something you have to actively believe. Obviously this is because you're a Christian and you're seeing things from a skewed perspective.

In reality, there's a total symmetry about the situation; God, and reincarnation, along with fairies, crystal healing, and similar such things. There's no difference: these are all things that people can happen to believe in due to a lack of scepticism. There is nothing about atheism which requires a sceptical mind: it comes about naturally if somebody is never told about the concept of God.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Precisely why I myself don't believe in reincarnation and see atheists who do as inconsistent, specifically if they use the "no evidence" argument all the time.

The above also applies to you. Inconsistent with what? Atheism is not equivalent to scepticism.
12-21-2010, 02:26 AM
Descensus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xei

The above also applies to you. Inconsistent with what? Atheism is not equivalent to scepticism.

If they constantly express their need for evidence before believing in something, and then believe in reincarnation, I find it inconsistent.
12-21-2010, 02:28 AM
Xei

So you misspoke?
12-21-2010, 02:32 AM
Descensus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xei

So you misspoke?

No, I think you misunderstood me. I said:
Precisely why I myself don't believe in reincarnation and see atheists who do [believe in reincarnation] as inconsistent, specifically if they use the "no evidence" argument all the time.
12-21-2010, 02:33 AM
Xei

Oh, so by specifically you meant 'only'? I was reading it as 'especially'. Okay. :)
12-21-2010, 02:37 AM
Descensus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xei

Oh, so by specifically you meant 'only'? I was reading it as 'especially'. Okay. :)

Technically it can be read "especially" since I think nearly every atheist uses that argument lol.
12-21-2010, 02:48 AM
Wantless

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xei

If you think about this properly you'll realise it doesn't make sense. You're assuming God is a given which people must use scepticism to actively reject, whereas reincarnation is something you have to actively believe. Obviously this is because you're a Christian and you're seeing things from a skewed perspective.

In reality, there's a total symmetry about the situation; God, and reincarnation, along with fairies, crystal healing, and similar such things. There's no difference: these are all things that people can happen to believe in due to a lack of scepticism. There is nothing about atheism which requires a sceptical mind: it comes about naturally if somebody is never told about the concept of God.

Please correct me if I wrong. A atheist is someone who denies the existence of god, right?
12-21-2010, 02:48 AM
Xei

Yes, although most would say that the word 'denies' is loaded. "Denying the existence of teapots orbiting the sun" is a weird sentence if you think about it. A more neutral definition is 'does not believe in God'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Technically it can be read "especially" since I think nearly every atheist uses that argument lol.

Hm, I think that's a misconception from hanging around the forums too long, haha.

I mean, you'd probably be surprised: in the UK most people are secular, not out of active scepticism, but simply out of habit. I'm sure many, many of these people believe in stupid things like homeopathy, or whatever. Then there are all of the religious people too, atheist Buddhists being the best example, who I suppose believe are atheists by faith, so really the converse.
12-21-2010, 02:53 AM
Descensus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wantless

Please correct me if I wrong. A atheist is someone who denies the existence of god, right?

I'm not sure the term "denies" is correct, since it leads one to think atheists say "there is no god" as if it were a fact. I prefer the definition I gave earlier: an atheist is a person who lacks a belief or does not believe in a god. I think that's a bit different from saying "there is no god." I'm sure there are those who outright claim "there is no god," but it's not very scientific of them. Either way, they lack a belief in god, so it doesn't really matter I suppose.

@Xei: I suppose I'm talking about people who use the "no evidence" argument then, even though most of them appear to be atheists lol.
12-21-2010, 02:57 AM
Xei

Mental resonance high five.
12-21-2010, 03:12 AM
Wantless

@Xei: Well this entire conversation is void/debunk simply by definition. Well I can say learn something new.
12-21-2010, 04:50 AM
Neoquestmoo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mario92

Vajrayana Buddhist...I had to read this about four times before it didn't sound so dirty. :chuckle:

Atheism is just the lack of belief in god. Not sure how creationism comes into play there...
And just so you know, lack of belief in god =/= lack in belief in afterlife. ;) It's rare, but there are atheists who think there is an afterlife of some sort.

Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for the knowledge :)
But I generally steer clear of religious arguments because I don't see the point, back in the day people might not know about it but now people can access info about religion from anywhere, and there's no point in convincing people they're wrong either way because unless they trust and know you, they won't really care about your argument.
12-21-2010, 04:58 AM
Spartiate

A lot of people have never been presented with a world view outside of their rather limited religious one. Arguing about religion allows them to think outside the box.
12-21-2010, 01:53 PM
Xei

I like arguing because I like working out what is true. If you value truth then you should value discussion.
12-21-2010, 11:33 PM
acatalephobic

I makes me incredibly sad and somewhat enraged by the fact that this thread managed to lead here...again.
12-22-2010, 12:57 AM
nina

Back on topic.
12-22-2010, 06:51 AM
Taosaur

What Nina said. Posts redacted for both being off-topic and bordering on personal attacks. Further 'borderline' attacks will be infracted as such.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acatalephobic

I makes me incredibly sad and somewhat enraged by the fact that this thread managed to lead here...again.
12-23-2010, 06:02 PM
Samsara

I think this poll would be better if the answers were broken down into specific religions, or at least types of religion eg, dharmic, monotheistic, east asian etc.

I am a buddhist, and while buddhism is a religion, it is very different from the most religions.
The word religious is most commonly associated with monotheistic religions, especially in the west.

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page