How many of you are Atheists? What about Theists?

[Hallistar]

I believe that it is silly to devote your life to a supreme being that may or may not exist. I respect those that believe in the Bible, Torah, Koran or any other religious texts, but what we believe has no effect on what is true. If we live our lives the best we can according to our own views, not according to a book, then we have done all we can in this life. If the being that does exist is indeed Omniscient like everyone says, then he will understand and appreciate that we lived our lives pleasing ourselves.

Yeah and if such a being according to what we hear is going to toss billions of people into hell for not believing in them, even though there is no proof for or against it, then we're kinda f--ked if thats the case when we die..

/wrist

[New Manvir]

Agnostic Anti-theist I suppose.

I'm pretty sure that that's impossible, as Agnostics are basically people who don't know whether the Divine exists or not.

I consider myself anti-religion, not anti-god.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-theist

Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is active opposition to theism. The etymological roots of the word are the Greek 'anti-' and 'theismos'. The term has had a range of applications; in secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to organized religion or to the belief in any deity, while in a theistic context, it sometimes refers to opposition to a specific god or gods.

It's kinda hard to be against something that may or may not exist.

[Samuraikoku]

As I understand your argument, you're assuming that because a deity, if it exists, would also be "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, immensely good," then anything that is "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, immensely good" must be a deity in the sense understood by the Abrahamic faiths. I'm afraid then that your argument, if I'm understanding it correctly, is simply invalid by virtue of its very form.

I don't know if the argument is valid or invalid, it still doesn't change the fact that on one side you hold whatever the teachings of Christ are in the same "divine" level as God, and on the other side you say there is no God. So I don't think it makes a difference, since it's basically believing in something divine.

Another problem: It is true that the Abrahamic deity, if it existed, would be "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, and immensely good." It is also true that I believe that the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth are "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, and immensely good." But consider this: It is true that a unicorn, if it existed, would have at least one horn (assuming it hasn't been hurt or anything). It is also true that I believe that a rhinoceros has at least one horn (assuming poachers haven't gotten to it or anything). But does it follow from that that, since I believe in fact of rhinoceroses having horns, I must also believe that unicorns exist?

Does it really matter? You seem to be deviating from the facts.

[Ifreann]

No, I mean that the force/existence beyond human understanding driving things is me.

Oh I see.

So what did I do to get on your bad side?

Sacrifice some porno to me, I'll see if I can work something out with Farnhamia.

[Conscentia]

I believe that it is silly to devote your life to a supreme being that may or may not exist. I respect those that believe in the Bible, Torah, Koran or any other religious texts, but what we believe has no effect on what is true. If we live our lives the best we can according to our own views, not according to a book, then we have done all we can in this life. If the being that does exist is indeed Omniscient like everyone says, then he will understand and appreciate that we lived our lives pleasing ourselves.

Why do (Usually American) people keep spelling qur'an wrong? Are they dyslexic? How hard is it to remember that it's spelled with a Q not a K?

Also: Why would he appreciate that we spent our lives trying to be hedonistic? If the books are right then he wants us to worship him...forever, and ever, and ever, and ever ,and ever, and ever, and ever...you get the picture.
If anyone ever read the various religious they would know that heaven is a wonderful place, but you won't notice because you'd be too busy worshipping the deity. I did. Boring book. If I was going to base my religion on a book I'd choose LOTR. Far better plot.

[Bluth Corporation]

As I understand your argument, you're assuming that because a deity, if it exists, would also be "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, immensely good," then anything that is "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, immensely good" must be a deity in the sense understood by the Abrahamic faiths. I'm afraid then that your argument, if I'm understanding it correctly, is simply invalid by virtue of its very form.

I don't know if the argument is valid or invalid, it still doesn't change the fact that on one side you hold whatever the teachings of Christ are in the same "divine" level as God,

No, I hold that they're on the same level as a god would be if a god existed. No contradiction there with belief in the factual non-existence of a god.

and on the other side you say there is no God. So I don't think it makes a difference, since it's basically believing in something divine.

Yes, but the divine thing in this case is teachings rather than a deific Supreme Being.

Another problem: It is true that the Abrahamic deity, if it existed, would be "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, and immensely good." It is also true that I believe that the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth are "sacred, enlightening, eternally true, and immensely good." But consider this: It is true that a unicorn, if it existed, would have at least one horn (assuming it hasn't been hurt or anything). It is also true that I believe that a rhinoceros has at least one horn (assuming poachers haven't gotten to it or anything). But does it follow from that that, since I believe in fact of rhinoceroses having horns, I must also believe that unicorns exist?

Does it really matter?

The logical strength of your argument that my belief in the divinity of Jesus's teachings is incompatible with my belief in the non-existence of a god matters quite a bit if you intended that argument to be taken seriously.

You seem to be deviating from the facts.

How so?

[Hydesland]

You've confused the word 'therefore' with the term 'yet paradoxically'.

No; being an atheist is an inherent, necessary, and unavoidable part of being a Christian. Therefore, all Christians are atheists.

I don't know if this is some weird interpretation of Tolstoy or something but what you're saying is just factually incorrect.

[Chinese Regions]

[Samuraikoku]

No, I hold that they're on the same level as a god would be if a god existed. No contradiction there with belief in the factual non-existence of a god.

So you're not a Christian, because Christians believe in God. Jesus Christ mentioned God I don't know how many times.

Yes, but the divine thing in this case is teachings rather than a deific Supreme Being.

It's the same thing. You're holding something divine.

The logical strength of your argument that my belief in the divinity of Jesus's teachings is incompatible with my belief in the non-existence of a god matters quite a bit if you intended that argument to be taken seriously.

See above. I don't see what difference you're trying to establish.

How so?

You're trying to attack my argument instead of explaining what exactly does Christianity mean in your own terms which nobody else seems to believe.

[Flat Beats]

Catholic, 'cause we have such a deep theology, and the general media is out to get us. So many lies are being taught about us (not just in the classroom, but also pop culture). I am faithful because I believe it is illogical to be otherwise, we have theology to answer some of the questions like the question of Evil etc.
I use this comparison a lot;
If you're right, and I am still faithful, then in the end it doesn't matter anyways, 'cause there's nothing for all eternity and what happened in my life wouldn't matter anyways. BUT, I led a peaceful and joy-filled life and probably made the world a better place.
If you're right, and I am not faithful, then in the end it wouldn't matter yadda yadda same as above. BUT, I led an 'exciting' life... but then again I have some... disadvantages (Family Research Council, personal experience, and other psychological research)
If I'm right, and I am faithful, it's all good.
If I'm right, and I am not faithful, it's just like, 'oh crap i'm screwed.'

This is just my opinion.

[Timurid Empire]

I believe in the Divinity of Humanity. We are, all of us, God.

It's hard for me to put into word my belief, but that would be the very basic of it.

[Ifreann]

I believe that it is silly to devote your life to a supreme being that may or may not exist. I respect those that believe in the Bible, Torah, Koran or any other religious texts, but what we believe has no effect on what is true. If we live our lives the best we can according to our own views, not according to a book, then we have done all we can in this life. If the being that does exist is indeed Omniscient like everyone says, then he will understand and appreciate that we lived our lives pleasing ourselves.

Why do (Usually American) people keep spelling qur'an wrong? Are they dyslexic? How hard is it to remember that it's spelled with a Q not a K?

Who do people keep spelling القرآن‎ wrong? How hard is it to remember that it's spelled with a ا not a Q?

[Ifreann]

Catholic, 'cause we have such a deep theology, and the general media is out to get us. So many lies are being taught about us (not just in the classroom, but also pop culture). I am faithful because I believe it is illogical to be otherwise, we have theology to answer some of the questions like the question of Evil etc.
I use this comparison a lot;
If you're right, and I am still faithful, then in the end it doesn't matter anyways, 'cause there's nothing for all eternity and what happened in my life wouldn't matter anyways. BUT, I led a peaceful and joy-filled life and probably made the world a better place.
If you're right, and I am not faithful, then in the end it wouldn't matter yadda yadda same as above. BUT, I led an 'exciting' life... but then again I have some... disadvantages (Family Research Council, personal experience, and other psychological research)
If I'm right, and I am faithful, it's all good.
If I'm right, and I am not faithful, it's just like, 'oh crap i'm screwed.'

This is just my opinion.

You share it with Blaise Pascal.

[New Democratic Ideas]

I am an atheist. I was Roman Catholic up until the summer of last year, after i was confirmed. Then, as George Carlin once said, I 'reached the age of reason.' There is no valid argument for god that hasn't been disproven over the years. Many 'miracles' have been scientifically explained, logical arguments have been disproven. Etc. The burden of proof lies on theists who are making the claim. I have not seen any convincing evidence. Yes, you cannot disprove god, but you can't disprove unicorns either (as somebody said). If it doesn't NEED to be there, and you have no evidence for it, there's no reason it exists. The god of the gaps is running out of places to hide, the Christian god is pretty logically impossible (for instance, one cannot be all powerful yet all knowing. If you know everything, you don't have the power to change it, since your change would already have been part of the known. This is just one low level example. There are others for theologians and such who have conceded this version of god.)

The only viable god option left is really deism, and this too relies on gaps in knowledge (in fact, I read somewhere that a scientist had found evidence of something (material) before the big bang (if any one doubts me I'll find the article) and puts something there that doesn't have to be there.

I was personally deconverted through 1. My disgust with the Catholic Church (I was looking for another religion at the time anyway) 2. Reading such books as God: The Failed Hypothesis and The God Delusion 3. The internet (many forums, but not this one) 4. Videos

Oh and the pascal's Wager thing:

If god is really that much of an a** and would put me in hell even though I've done nothing wronmg my entire life, then I'd rather burn than be faithful to him. Because that is the devil.

[Bluth Corporation]

No; being an atheist is an inherent, necessary, and unavoidable part of being a Christian. Therefore, all Christians are atheists.

I don't know if this is some weird interpretation of Tolstoy

Inspired by Tolstoy, yes.

or something but what you're saying is just factually incorrect.

How so?

[Flat Beats]

Catholic, 'cause we have such a deep theology, and the general media is out to get us. So many lies are being taught about us (not just in the classroom, but also pop culture). I am faithful because I believe it is illogical to be otherwise, we have theology to answer some of the questions like the question of Evil etc.
I use this comparison a lot;
If you're right, and I am still faithful, then in the end it doesn't matter anyways, 'cause there's nothing for all eternity and what happened in my life wouldn't matter anyways. BUT, I led a peaceful and joy-filled life and probably made the world a better place.
If you're right, and I am not faithful, then in the end it wouldn't matter yadda yadda same as above. BUT, I led an 'exciting' life... but then again I have some... disadvantages (Family Research Council, personal experience, and other psychological research)
If I'm right, and I am faithful, it's all good.
If I'm right, and I am not faithful, it's just like, 'oh crap i'm screwed.'

This is just my opinion.

You share it with Blaise Pascal.

:D I didn't even know he existed, that's awesome. I always sorta associated my belief with the likes of Max Planck as well, but ya'know.

[Bluth Corporation]

No, I hold that they're on the same level as a god would be if a god existed. No contradiction there with belief in the factual non-existence of a god.

So you're not a Christian,

I am.

because Christians believe in God.

They don't.

Jesus Christ mentioned God I don't know how many times.

Actual Jesus, or the corruption of Jesus that the authors of the Gospels invented to justify their cult of the divinity of his person because they could not recognize the divinity of his teachings?

Yes, but the divine thing in this case is teachings rather than a deific Supreme Being.

It's the same thing. You're holding something divine.

You're assuming that if something is divine, then it is a god in the Abrahamic sense. That is simply not a valid assumption, at all.

You're trying to attack my argument instead of explaining what exactly does Christianity mean in your own terms which nobody else seems to believe.

I'm attacking your argument because I believe your argument to be flawed. I have explained, to you as well as others, what Christianity means repeatedly in this thread and the other one. Everything I've already said on the topic doesn't just go out the window because it's a different subject or a few days later.

[Samuraikoku]

or something but what you're saying is just factually incorrect.

How so?

Seriously, is "how so?" all you can say? Your pedant language does not scare me at all.

[Norstal]

Catholic, 'cause we have such a deep theology, and the general media is out to get us. So many lies are being taught about us (not just in the classroom, but also pop culture). I am faithful because I believe it is illogical to be otherwise, we have theology to answer some of the questions like the question of Evil etc.
I use this comparison a lot;
If you're right, and I am still faithful, then in the end it doesn't matter anyways, 'cause there's nothing for all eternity and what happened in my life wouldn't matter anyways. BUT, I led a peaceful and joy-filled life and probably made the world a better place.
If you're right, and I am not faithful, then in the end it wouldn't matter yadda yadda same as above. BUT, I led an 'exciting' life... but then again I have some... disadvantages (Family Research Council, personal experience, and other psychological research)
If I'm right, and I am faithful, it's all good.
If I'm right, and I am not faithful, it's just like, 'oh crap i'm screwed.'

This is just my opinion.

So I'm screwed because I deconverted from Catholics? What? Are the nuns going to beat me with a meter stick or something?

[Strathy]

I am an atheist for the simple reason that scienctific eveidence has convinced me more that religion.

[Ifreann]

You share it with Blaise Pascal.

I didn't even know he existed, that's awesome. I always sorta associated my belief with the likes of Max Planck as well, but ya'know.

It's not so much awesome, as it is unfortunate. Your reasoning for worshipping God has been held as illogical for longer than you've been alive.

[Owlrusopia]

Catholic, 'cause we have such a deep theology, and the general media is out to get us. So many lies are being taught about us (not just in the classroom, but also pop culture). I am faithful because I believe it is illogical to be otherwise, we have theology to answer some of the questions like the question of Evil etc.
I use this comparison a lot;
If you're right, and I am still faithful, then in the end it doesn't matter anyways, 'cause there's nothing for all eternity and what happened in my life wouldn't matter anyways. BUT, I led a peaceful and joy-filled life and probably made the world a better place.
If you're right, and I am not faithful, then in the end it wouldn't matter yadda yadda same as above. BUT, I led an 'exciting' life... but then again I have some... disadvantages (Family Research Council, personal experience, and other psychological research)
If I'm right, and I am faithful, it's all good.
If I'm right, and I am not faithful, it's just like, 'oh crap i'm screwed.'

This is just my opinion.

You share it with Blaise Pascal.

Pascal's Wager is a logical fallacy, for those of you who are unaware.

[Samuraikoku]

I am.

Denial.

They don't.

Denial.

Actual Jesus, or the corruption of Jesus that the authors of the Gospels invented to justify their cult of the divinity of his person because they could not recognize the divinity of his teachings?

The evidence suggests it was actual Jesus. After all, that's why he got crucified.

You're assuming that if something is divine, then it is a god in the Abrahamic sense. That is simply not a valid assumption, at all.

Is there any other way you can define "divine"?

I'm attacking your argument because I believe your argument to be flawed. I have explained, to you as well as others, what Christianity means repeatedly in this thread and the other one. Everything I've already said on the topic doesn't just go out the window because it's a different subject or a few days later.

And yet you've still said nothing.

[Norstal]

How so?

Seriously, is "how so?" all you can say? Your pedant language does not scare me at all.

Now now Koku-chan, this is how it goes:

If Bluth is in thread then mention Christians have no god.

If Bluth is not in thread, then mention Christians have a god.

It's the only way to appease him.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I didn't even know he existed, that's awesome. I always sorta associated my belief with the likes of Max Planck as well, but ya'know.

It's not so much awesome, as it is unfortunate. Your reasoning for worshipping God has been held as illogical for longer than you've been alive.

It's the same with the Germans and the Hoff.