Are you religious?

[CQMS]

Don't worry about the god side of things, just the essential message, don't be nasty to people, look after your family, help people if you can, and don't covet your neighbours ass.

Mind you my neighbour is a right little minx, I'd love to covet her a bit.

[HH_2]

What I can’t tolerate is view of other stronger beliefs that ostracise those of a different view.
Live by your belief by all means, but not to the detriment of others, bit hippy'ish, maybe?

If YOUR belief is strong enough, no one else should be able a affect it, no matter what or who you belive in

It's a very strange concept, the idea that someone can hold a belief against all rational evidence, against all persuasion and coercion.


Essentially then you either believe X Y or Z because you have been told to ever since you were a kid or because you have seen or heard or experienced something which persuaded you that X Y or Z is true, no matter what else might ever happen in your life said belief will be unshakeable.

Pretty dodgy really, rather like A Flews (or was it that Wisdom chap?) invisible gardner analogy: if you will allow nothing to count against said belief how can it possibly have any meaning?

[CharlieBubbles]

Treat other as you wish to be treated . . EASY . . .

[Aunty Stella]

Is this "Deity" you speak of just a euthamism for what we just don't understand...yet.

Edd

Yep, in which case I suppose I fall into "Agnostic"

I am very scientific, think that all of this "Adam and Eve" stuff is total b0llocks, think that the Bible, Koran et al was written by a load of p1ssed blokes that thought "I wonder what the thick idiots will think of this when they dig it up", believe what I can see and prove with my own eyes and hard facts and yet still do think "there's more to it". I just don't understand or comprehend what that "more" could be.

My bold, there is more to the big bang and Darwin, we may not be right, but the truth will be found in science and evolution not religion.

But I don’t need a big funny coloured building to enforce my view.

I'm pretty much the same. The only time I would enter a church is to oggle bridesmaids or to sell something to them.

I think a lot of the "more to it" thing actually stems FROM my understanding of physics. My knowledge of it will not let me comprehend the existence of "nothing" prior to the Big Bang, i.e. the lack of physical matter and time, or the mind fcuking one that is infinity which defies finite matter and time.

Our tiny brains can not comprehend the exitence of "nothing" or "forever" and although I am very well read with the likes of Hawkings, Glauber, Laughlin etc, I have never found a satisfactory answer that can explain either.

Therefore, my logical answer is that I can't ever figure it out and there must therefore be "more to it". That "more" being something that defies everything we understand. I have no problem with believing that that may be some sort of Deity as this is equally as likely (if not more likely) than a scientific explanation of "everything" and "nothing".

[desert_lighthouse]

I agree with Dawkins that there is probably (if not certainly) no god in the personal, individual prayer answering sense.

However this doesn’t really blow the whole religion thing out of the water. Dawkins is making the same mistake as the loony creationists by treating the bible as literal truth. It’s not. A completely literal interpretation of the bible is actually a relatively new idea (the reformation) and there are plenty of medieval scholars who question the genesis story for example. Even the early Christians (such as Origen of Alexandria in the 3rd century) didn’t take all of it literally, but included allegorical and analogical interpretations. Even Darwin said in the Origin of species that his work should not conflict with religious thought.

As the poet laureate Andrew motion said, without a good working knowledge of the bible (an “essential piece of cultural luggage�), one can’t fully appreciate the art and literature of the past 1000 years. I’m not particularly Christian, but I am the product of and live in a culture that has been shaped by 1500 years of Christianity. I don’t think we should ridicule the whole the whole of the Christian tradition based on the antics of a few creationist/evangelical fcukwits.

[KevinB]

I dont understand how you can be 'agnostic', you must lean one way or the other?

Actually, agnosticism makes the most sense, rationally, as we cannot know for sure if God exists or not.

I disagree.

I could make something up right now that would be impossible to prove. Just because I've said it doesn't make it any more factual than when it was in my mind. We all remember Russells teapot.

How can you disprove something that wasn't there to begin with, is invisible, cannot be detected by any scientific means and people blindly believe in because it's written in a book.

Just because disproving and proving something are equal in their impossibility does not put them on equal footing.

Edd

P.S. Euphemism, thanks. My spelling has always been worthy of a mong.

Have to say, from what I remember from a basic logic course, you are right about that - is not the arguer's job to have to prove the non-existence of something, but instead, its existence.

But on a related note, I read awhile back that supernatural beliefs may be hardwired into us from birth - not that it makes the existence of God any more or less likely - but perhaps does serve some evolutionary purpose.

[Bert_Preast]

But on a related note, I read awhile back that supernatural beliefs may be hardwired into us from birth - not that it makes the existence of God any more or less likely - but perhaps does serve some evolutionary purpose.

Not hardwired into me since birth, as far back as I can remember I've never thought of myself as anything but a pointless talking monkey.

But having asked other atheists if they're the same, it seems I'm in the minority. As I'm much better looking and more intelligent than everyone else, I can only assume you're right about evolution and I'm the next step along the way. IMHO, of course.

[Civi_Git]

But on a related note, I read awhile back that supernatural beliefs may be hardwired into us from birth - not that it makes the existence of God any more or less likely - but perhaps does serve some evolutionary purpose.

Not hardwired into me since birth, as far back as I can remember I've never thought of myself as anything but a pointless talking monkey.

But having asked other atheists if they're the same, it seems I'm in the minority. As I'm much better looking and more intelligent than everyone else, I can only assume you're right about evolution and I'm the next step along the way. IMHO, of course.

Who needs God when you can be your own ? :D

[Mozzie]

I agree with Dawkins that there is probably (if not certainly) no god in the personal, individual prayer answering sense.

However this doesn’t really blow the whole religion thing out of the water. Dawkins is making the same mistake as the loony creationists by treating the bible as literal truth. It’s not. A completely literal interpretation of the bible is actually a relatively new idea (the reformation) and there are plenty of medieval scholars who question the genesis story for example. Even the early Christians (such as Origen of Alexandria in the 3rd century) didn’t take all of it literally, but included allegorical and analogical interpretations. Even Darwin said in the Origin of species that his work should not conflict with religious thought.

As the poet laureate Andrew motion said, without a good working knowledge of the bible (an “essential piece of cultural luggage�), one can’t fully appreciate the art and literature of the past 1000 years. I’m not particularly Christian, but I am the product of and live in a culture that has been shaped by 1500 years of Christianity. I don’t think we should ridicule the whole the whole of the Christian tradition based on the antics of a few creationist/evangelical fcukwits.

Don't forget that the influence is not just one-way, the cultures of peoples converted by a religion, also change- however subtly- the religion itself.

Also one of the arguments by religious people that annoys me the most is the one that says that their religion e.g. the ten commandments, is the source and only reason for people behaving morally. No it's your culture that you grew up in that instilled the values and morals you live your life by, not the direction you aim your prayers in!

[dennis10]

I call myself an atheist, but really I'm just anti-religious. No one can say 100% there is no 'being' like god that created the big bang (even though that it is very unlikely, and is just as logical as saying there are unicorns, or that there are black people with downs syndrome (cue the inevitable googling to prove me wrong)). I was brought up in a neutral family where no one use to talk about religion or atheism. I use to pray a bit when things got bad e.g. when Arsenal or England were in a penalty shoot out. Sometimes he helped Arsenal win it, sometimes he didn’t. He never helped England though. Anyway, I was brainwashed by my Primary school into believing it. They would take us to church, sing hymns and make us listen to a man with a stupid thing round his neck. It backfired. To me, it seemed religion was a bit gay (no offence to gays). Going to church with my school every couple of months and singing hymns in assembly everyday. What is it with singing to god. Instead of sacrificing a human or goat like they use to, they just sing hymns. That’s 'elf & safety for ya.
I also like the response you get when you tell a religious person you're an atheist. "You're going to go to hell". That's a nice reason to believe in something. 'I believe in god so I don't get punished'.

PS Has anyone seen those buses with, "There is probably no god" on the side? It's by the British humanist association. Anyway, I was on my way back from the AFCO, and I saw the Christians comeback. "The fool hath said there is no god" Psalm something or other. Bit offensive I thought.