Atheists

[tzor]

OK Time for the ironic joke of the day.

Early Christians were called \"athiests\" by Roman authorities because they refused to believe in the Roman gods and goddesses.

 

[finn17]

Nice one Mr The Bitter

Originally posted by Herb the bitter
Ha! I knew I\'d seen it somewhere. You can see Vincegamer here:

http://www.coolminiornot.com/forums/viewthread.php?tid=15172&page=4

Grabbed, saved and even enhanced for posterity/bribery/evidence etc:bouncy:

 

[Duende]

I just typed in \"religions\" at Wikipedia and on a pie chart on the first page of Major Religious Groups the \"Not religious\"(into which athesists fall) is the third most common (16%) coming after Christianity (33%) and Islam (21%).

Originally posted by Avicenna
What would you be if you believe that the gods in all major religions are one and the same (whether they be the creator, lesser gods or even angels) and that the fundamental truths are all identical, but have been interpreted differently over time and depending on the environment...

A little looking around there lead me to think that you would be a monotheist.

Interesting stuff...

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by Avicenna

Originally posted by DrEvilmonki

Originally posted by vincegamer

Originally posted by Avicenna
What would you be if you believe that the gods in all major religions are one and the same (whether they be the creator, lesser gods or even angels) and that the fundamental truths are all identical, but have been interpreted differently over time and depending on the environment...

Hindu

Really? Learn something new every day.

No, Hinduism is something very specific. It has \'clauses\' within it that may match these ideas but fundamentally they believe that their faith is right, whereas what I was talking about is more the idea that the fundamental truths in all of these \'world religions\' is all the same and all \'right\', but manipulated and changed by mans selfish need for power over others.

Never said 112what I learn is right!lol

 

[Brimshack]

Originally posted by vincegamer

Originally posted by ZeCorto
It makes me wonder: why is denial of belief worse than the profession of a different belief?

Judging from my own numerous conversations on the point, I would guess it is because atheists don\'t have a uniform moral code.

Christians, Jews and Muslims all have these books where you can look up the rules. They were supposedly \"laid down\" by Authority.
Atheists have no book and have to come up with a moral code all on their own.
Those I consider weak or at least unimaginative cannot conceive of morality that is not the product of Authority.
Therefore they believe all atheism to be the road to chaos. This is ridiculous because there are tons of atheists out there and they are not shooting each other in traffic.

Look at me, butting in, like I\'ve been part of this converstion all along, but anyway...

I would hazard a different explanation. I think the issue is that atheism is something people are accustomed to talking about in the absence of representative advocates. I think about how often people talk about Atheists (and other unbelievers) in Church, often making it up as they go. The characteristics of an atheist are often deduced from the self image of the Theists. If believing in God means you\'re moral, that you respect your mom, and that you don\'t steal, ...then not believing in God must mean you are ...(fill in list of horribles). It\'s not very sound reasoning, but it\'s not entirely restricted to Christians. (Atheists often do this when we talk about the importance of reason and the horribles of superstitition ...ironically claiming difference when we are behaving most like the pious.)

Some people seem to become so accustomed to using unbelievers as a sort of free floating signifier to build their own religious identity, that confrontations with actual unbelievers become a surreal experience for them. It\'s as though the boogie-man showed up, and said; \"hey man, it ain\'t like that...\" But if the boogie-man isn\'t what he\'s made out to be, then maybe the hero of the story isn\'t what he claims to be either. This is where some people really can\'t make the adjustment. It isn\'t because they misunderstand the unbeliever; it\'s because they need the unbeliever to play a specific role in their own universe. Questions about actual atheistic behavior just don\'t enter into the picture.

Case in point, go on any religious message board with a debate section open to non-believers, and watch how often self-professed Atheists are told they aren\'t really what they claim to be. You can also see quite a number of religious proponents talking about atheists in the 3rd person while addressing atheists directly. You can see them ticking off teh attributes of atheism, even as a half a dozen atheists are in the conversation saying, no that\'s got nothing to do with us. The problem isn\'t a simple mistake; thinking atheists are x when they are really y; it\'s a matter of rejecting even the possibility that there might be a real person in that label, and that that person could speak for himself. For some people the Sunday-school stories are so vivid, there just isn\'t any room for the real thing. You either play the part, they have set for you, or you get dismissed entirely.

...Okay, sometmes I just like to ramble. Pay me no mind.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Not at all, quite a reasonably well thought out contribution. Feel free to ramble all you want!

 

[Infidel Castro]

Originally posted by Brimshack

Originally posted by vincegamer

Originally posted by ZeCorto
It makes me wonder: why is denial of belief worse than the profession of a different belief?

Judging from my own numerous conversations on the point, I would guess it is because atheists don\'t have a uniform moral code.

Christians, Jews and Muslims all have these books where you can look up the rules. They were supposedly \"laid down\" by Authority.
Atheists have no book and have to come up with a moral code all on their own.
Those I consider weak or at least unimaginative cannot conceive of morality that is not the product of Authority.
Therefore they believe all atheism to be the road to chaos. This is ridiculous because there are tons of atheists out there and they are not shooting each other in traffic.

Look at me, butting in, like I\'ve been part of this converstion all along, but anyway...

I would hazard a different explanation. I think the issue is that atheism is something people are accustomed to talking about in the absence of representative advocates. I think about how often people talk about Atheists (and other unbelievers) in Church, often making it up as they go. The characteristics of an atheist are often deduced from the self image of the Theists. If believing in God means you\'re moral, that you respect your mom, and that you don\'t steal, ...then not believing in God must mean you are ...(fill in list of horribles). It\'s not very sound reasoning, but it\'s not entirely restricted to Christians. (Atheists often do this when we talk about the importance of reason and the horribles of superstitition ...ironically claiming difference when we are behaving most like the pious.)

Some people seem to become so accustomed to using unbelievers as a sort of free floating signifier to build their own religious identity, that confrontations with actual unbelievers become a surreal experience for them. It\'s as though the boogie-man showed up, and said; \"hey man, it ain\'t like that...\" But if the boogie-man isn\'t what he\'s made out to be, then maybe the hero of the story isn\'t what he claims to be either. This is where some people really can\'t make the adjustment. It isn\'t because they misunderstand the unbeliever; it\'s because they need the unbeliever to play a specific role in their own universe. Questions about actual atheistic behavior just don\'t enter into the picture.

Case in point, go on any religious message board with a debate section open to non-believers, and watch how often self-professed Atheists are told they aren\'t really what they claim to be. You can also see quite a number of religious proponents talking about atheists in the 3rd person while addressing atheists directly. You can see them ticking off teh attributes of atheism, even as a half a dozen atheists are in the conversation saying, no that\'s got nothing to do with us. The problem isn\'t a simple mistake; thinking atheists are x when they are really y; it\'s a matter of rejecting even the possibility that there might be a real person in that label, and that that person could speak for himself. For some people the Sunday-school stories are so vivid, there just isn\'t any room for the real thing. You either play the part, they have set for you, or you get dismissed entirely.

...Okay, sometmes I just like to ramble. Pay me no mind.

Ah, dualism! There has to be someone who\'s the opposite of you everywhere to keep the balance and they have to fit the bill fotr it to work...only they never do, so people need to maintain the illusion of those opposites in their own minds.

What a top entrance into the thread, squire. Much respect! :beer:

 

[Torn blue sky]

Any excuse for a beer\'s fine by me! :beer:

 

[Brimshack]

Beer it is!


:beer: