Atheism

That's why I don't believe in religion. I just figure I have my own relationship with God, and that it's not anybody else's business. I believe that I should just make God proud by being the best person I can possibly be and by spreading love wherever I go. That being said, I think going to church is a waste of time because the church is corrupt. Instead of spreading the love, they spread hate to anyone they think doesn't follow the rules. I can't stand being around that much hatred. So I don't believe in religion. I believe in God and Love.

 

You don't have to be proven wrong to be open and understanding of other people's thoughts and belief. How can I prove your thinking is any better or worse then anyone else's? That'd be subjective anyway, and would shift depending on the circumstance and context of said thoughts and beliefs.

It may be true for all of us, that all our thoughts and proven ideals could be all useless or untrue.
Just you an't always prove what faith is with reason and evidence. That's what having faith is all about, it's putting your hope's and belief into something because you agree on it to some extent within yourself, you use it to explain the unexplainable. Can't really prove something you believe in, that's why it's not worth proving it.

 

Sorry, I wasn' t very clear, I wasn' t asking you to prove my thinking better or worse than anyone else' s. I should have said something like "why don' t you explain how the pros of religion outrace its cons", or just to list the pros or something. Thinking of the pros and the cons, as subjective as it might be, is our only way to define our morality (well, that or cherry-picking what feels good rather than what could be argued to be good).

You said you wished atheists to be more open and understanding of other people's thoughts and belief, but "other people's thoughts and belief" is awfully large and vague. You know there' s awful stuff in there, right ? If we were to list the pros and cons of racism or homophobia the cons would outrace the pros, but I don' t suppose you' d interpret it as me lacking openness or understanding.

You can' t explain the unexplainable. You can' t agree with something that can' t be demonstrated either. Basically it' s a blind bet, you just picked an assumption that feels good to you. Which brings me back to my initial point : I' m all for hope, but you don' t need to assume anything or take anything on faith to be able to have hope. Are the kids who believe in Santa happier than those who don' t and never did ?

It' s not worth proving a belief (ultimately it' s impossible), but it is worth thinking about the consequences your belief has for others. There' s no such thing as certainty, true, that' s exactly why I call for a practical approach.

Ultimately I don' t care if some people chose to take things on faith. No really, I don' t, freedom of thought yaddi yaddi yadda. All I care about is whether their beliefs have bad consequences for me/society or not. That' s a case by case issue, there are many beliefs/believers I don' t have a problem with, and too many beliefs for me to have an opinion on them all.

 

I can't really speak for every religion since I am not well versed in all of them deeply enough to give a proper answer in terms of comparing pros and cons, which again could be different for what is good for me and could be bad for you.
I only say to learn about religions before making statements that the cons outweigh the pros on any occasions for religion.

To be open enough to listen to all sides of the story, from various sources and to verify what the facts and fictions on the topic are.
To be understanding enough to accept why people may have come to that conclusion in their thought and beliefs, without rushing to a conclusion on the topic

People should try and do this to leanr new thinks and make better judgements on things.
What I mainly meant is that a number of atheists and agnostics simply shake of every religious person as the same, not because they know that person, but because they have a preconceived notion on said person. Like after 9/11, where every Muslim in the western world was looked at with suspicion not because of their character but because of what limited view people had on them. Atheists tend to stick to the idea that everyone believes in the same religious ideals that are written down in a holy book or spoken by a prophet, but that's rarely the case that anyone adheres to the customs of their religion word for word. It's about knowing each person's views and ideals on their own religion.

I've personally never seen Jupiter but I am told it exists. Does that mean that Jupiter is real or that I believe what someone has told me? Good knowledge may be gained from observation, but we can't observe everything, sometimes we have to have faith in what we are told by others who have observed something that we might not have.

Which is how hypothesis usually come about. Belief isn't as rock solid as a agree and disagree notion, there are many ideas people have.

Hope and belief aren't the same. Hope is when you hope something happens, belief is when you believe it will happen. That's a pretty basic example, but it's just to kind of summarise it.

Ideally your faith shouldn't matter to anyone else and be accepted. But oh well...
I wll note that what religion says and what people say are two different things. Example, Jesus said to love thy neighbour as said in the Bible, whilst people use the belief in Christianity to justify Holy Wars.
What I mean is that religion isn't at fault here, Jesus saying to love thy neighbour is a noble and lovely goal, it is the people who declare that war in the name of a religion is at fault. It is the person's responsibility to use their religion to only good effect and to keep true to its teaching, however that is not always the case, but religion shouldn't be judged by the actions of some.

 

I'd like religion a whole lot better if it didn't stick its nose where it no longer belongs, i.e. in the explanation of natural phenomena (such as the origin of all things).

 

That's a bit of a generalisation on the matter.

 

It's a blatant generalisation, but I don't care. At all. I can't begin to count the amount of times I've heard Christians say "But the Bible shouildn't be taken literally" whenever an outrageous event is described that obviously didn't happen by the letter. Makes me wonder why they take anything in the big book literally, up to and including the existence of God himself. If an ever increasing percentage of your beloved book is found out to have been a hyperbole of epic proportions, it's high time to question the reliability of the rest. Sometimes, making generalisations is the smart thing to do.

 

I'm going to guess you haven't read any of the above?

 

Of course not. If something important had been said I'm sure they'd repeat themselves to make me reconsider.

 

I would, but i'm lazy. If this was actually in Discussion I probably would of but.... meh not discussion so whatevs

 

I was merely stating how it looks like from where I' m from (I went to catechism for years btw), anyone' s free to jump in and explain which pros I missed. Besides, tbh I was thinking more about faith in general than religion per say.

I know not everyone is the same, I' m talking to you but you keep dancing all around. That' s ok though, I think you just don' t want to half-ass it or bother writing pages and pages . Plus, Spam Zone and all, I think I' ll shut up soon.

That' s not faith, that' s trust. If you get suspicious you' re free to re-do the experiments yourself or to hunt fallacies. I don' t have faith in what I' m told. Either I found something that was evidence enough for me or I didn' t. If I do give my trust without sufficient evidence for me then that would be me betting because circumstances forced me to, I wouldn' t turn that trust into a belief. Skeptic here. Not everyone has the same standard for evidence though, I get that.

Yeah, I noticed that sometimes people' s actions don' t match their professed belief, or that their what they call a belief doesn' t actually qualify as a belief, it' s more of a hunch.

I talked about hope because that' s the only good thing faith could bring I saw you mention.

It doesn' t, not to me, it' s what I just said. I only mind the consequences your faith might have on your actions and decisions.
If your faith doesn' t color your actions in a way that affects me negatively in any way then good for you, keep it up.

Wait, this is getting confusing. Maybe we should have agreed on a definition for religion first. If you define religion as the book then sure, it' s just a book.

 

I've never quite understood the idea of praising and worshiping that religions seem to employ.
To my knowledge to truly praise and worship something is an alien concept to most humans, it is to divorce yourself from human concerns and seek the numinous something that most people are incapeable of.
Contrary to what people say to it is quite hard to understand that you're not the center of the universe. Even when people go about how we're a speck in the universe it's usually just to stroke ones ego

 

This is exactly why I didn't read the rest of the thread in the first place. I'm sure you all had some very intelligent things to say, but I just couldn't be arsed. XD

 

Coexistence is cool guys.

Be cool.

 

Y'know, this has been my favourite thread ever to read.

'Cause it all started with a joke, and now look.

 

And that is why jokes are forbidden on khv

 

But KHV is full of hipsters.

Also, too lazy to type up a long post but I agree with Patman almost entirely.