Atheism is the best?
Solipsism is the way to go. You're welcome for this train and, you know, life.
Comment has been collapsed.
I will bump this thread for 2 reasons: First, thanks for the giveaways!
Secondly, for the sake of discussion:
OP (being "supercollider") has said atheism to not be a religion, yet (s)he and others in the comments acted religious (Merriam-Webster, see definition 3a and more even 3b) about it.
Also, OP has noted some "benefits of being an atheist" which are not strictly "benefits of being an atheist", as has been noted in earlier comments.
And, please consider this quote, form OP:
I would like religious people to stop trying to shove their religion on everyone else
Now, if we take into account that there are plenty of atheists who are religious in ways and in behaviour, for example the large groups that 'worship' science and treat science and it's men (i.e. scientists) as godly or the likes. And then consider that those atheists also try to "shove their religion on everyone else" by prohibiting anything they consider religious.
These atheists are very much worse thatn plenty of religious people I know, according to the complaints usually heard about religious people.
So, some open questions, without prejudice:
What is your position on those people? Where do you stand? (atheist, religious, agnostic, other?)
And, most importantly: Why?
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, please note: Christians are allowed to eat what they want, when they want. All food was made clean in the New Testament, under a new covenant.
Yes, there are rules on food in the Old Testament, which the Jews (Judaists) still follow, but that is no longer relevant for Christians, since Christ gave a new covenant to replace the old.
Besides, some of the "benefits of being an atheist" are the same as of most major religions, since the core of those is based on love, peace, respect and understanding.
Comment has been collapsed.
now the, the bible is not the bible, the old testament, we don't have to pay attention to those parts because, blah blah blah.
new and old is all the bible. there is no place that say it is OK to ignore the old. just some pastors decide to tell everyone, hey everyone the old testament is so extreme and doesn't jive with modern life so we are going to ignore it.
kind of proves my point.
Comment has been collapsed.
I believe you are right.
Leeuw96, please show me where in the New Testament it says that you don't have to follow the rules of the Old testament.
I can show you several places in the New Testament where Jesus explicitly says that the laws of the Old Testament are still valid and need to be followed:
Matthew 5:17-19
Luke 16:17
John 7:19
Comment has been collapsed.
First of all, I never stated that Christians do not have to follow the rules of the Old Testament.
These verses are all about the laws and commandments (even specifically said "the Law of Moses" being the Ten Commandments), not the covenant. There is a clear distinction between these things.
In the law, the ten commandments, it is not said what you can or cannot eat.
Even more, in Matthew 5:17, Jesus says He came to fulfill (See Merriam-Webster, definition 2 fits best in the sentence) the law, so it ends there, at least, the parts about sacrifice, as Christ was the lamb to be sacrificed to reconcile God and the sinful humans.
A covenant is made between two (or perhaps more) groups.
The covenant made in Exodus and enforced in Leviticus, was between God and the People of Israel, as they were freed from oppression in Egypt. Read Exodus 19:3-6 which makes clear that it is to be said to the children of Israel.
Jesus makes a new covenant with the, later called, Christians, saying that they are not bound in the rules that were made at earlier time and for a specific purpose. In this covenant, there is no difference between Jew and gentile (Romans 10:12 and Galatians 3:28). Romans 10 further eludes on this, by showing the laws are not the ultimate thing giving salvation, but that only faith does.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you taking my words out of context and distorting them on purpose because you are unable to prove your point otherwise? or just not able to understand what I wrote?
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you saying that religious doctrine is just as valid as science?
Science is what we observe as reality. Religion is based on faith, with little or no reflection in reality.
How you can see those two things as the same, I have no idea.
Also, please show me examples of Atheists "prohibiting anything they consider religious". I have never seen this.
If you are talking about the government having religious monuments on government property, or having Christian invocations at government meetings, then you are not understanding what is occurring in these cases.
Some Atheists don't want the government to appear to be advocating one religion over another, so if you have a Christian statue on government grounds, you also need to allow monuments from other religions or non-religious groups. Same thing with invocations. If you have a Christian invocation before every government meeting, that gives the appearance that only Christians are represented by the government, and that the government endorses the Christian religions.
It turns out that when the government allows these other groups to have their own monument or their own invocation, it is the Christians that protest it, not Atheists. And because they cause so much trouble over it, the government usually just decides to disallow all outside religious and non-religious monuments/invocations within the government space.
Comment has been collapsed.
For the examples, I found some very unfriendly, even hostile, groups around the web earlier, couldn't find them again, so I'll leave it at that, we can scrap it if you wish so.
These atheist gatherings, who proudly flaunted their atheist nature, were not willing to discuss or debate anything outside their own safe zone.
I did now find a few, for example "Atheist Republic" which uses the exact same arguments and reasoning against religions, as they alway blame religious people for using them. Arguments such as "you have to provide eveidence for my counterclaim" amongst others.
And no, I was not talking about governments showing religion or any such thing.
I was specifically speaking about hatred against religious people from atheists. This is still a thing, several sources have been named earlier in this thread, about specific violent outbursts of this kind. However, it is not limited to this, but also to everyday interactions and prejudices.
As an example, the hostiliyy shown in the reactions to my comment, shows a level of prejudice against me or my statements.
Possibly, and probably, because I show arguments against certain atheists. You (supercollider and SpaceClick) feel attacked by this, and either attack me personally or use other fallacies (see also: List of fallacies).
I can name some either or both of you used: Straw man, Slippery slope, Suggestive question.
Please note: I am not saying religious people don't do the same things, albeit vice versa perhaps, but I am simply showing atheists are not morally or otherwise 'superior' as is often claimed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, please show me examples of Atheists "prohibiting anything they consider religious". I have never seen this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union
Comment has been collapsed.
As my previous comment did not yield a respons without prejudice, but only one condemning me or my thoughts, I think I will now further abstain from participating in this discussion.
supercollider (OP) and SpaceClick either attacked me personally or used other fallacies (see also: List of fallacies). against me, and this does not contribute to any form of healthy debate, argument or discussion.
Edit:
Okay, I will add one last thing, since I am a man of science.
In science, we learn that we should always question, research and discuss things.
We also learn that we should adjust our scope to the provided information, for example, if evidence shows plants can fly, we should adjust our scope, by accepting it, researching it further, and eventually disregard earlier evidences against it.
The same goes in religions, sometimes newer tules are given, that surpass or disregard the old ones, such as thd one I showed about food.
Lastly, all the information I showed was a mere google away, so nobody can say it was not publicly known.
Comment has been collapsed.
16,299 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Carenard
82 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by WaxWorm
56 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by Carenard
1,811 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by ngoclong19
72 Comments - Last post 10 hours ago by Reidor
545 Comments - Last post 13 hours ago by UltraMaster
41 Comments - Last post 13 hours ago by ViToos
19 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by discreetly
95 Comments - Last post 43 minutes ago by Vasharal
49 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Cim
117 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Cole420
8 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by StrangeAsAngels
72 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by eeev
9,531 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by NoYeti
Happy End of Summer! Plus…
Some people seem scared of Atheism.
Atheism just means:
A = without
Theism = Belief in a god
What are the benefits of being an atheist?
Religion relies on fear to keep you in line.
Chris Hedges has written about this. He went to seminary school and is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist.
I suppose less fearful and more open people gravitate to Atheism.
Christopher Hitchens was an interesting author you might want to check out.
What I am writing here is just my perspective. Not mean to hurt anyone's feelings.
I am not saying I dislike religious people. I would like religious people to stop trying to shove their religion on everyone else; I mean, making laws. Stop making laws based on your religion, please. ie. Separation of Church and State! And let go of your superstitions and fears!
Ticket
If you are on my black list and want to enter, please post asking for removal.
Plus for group members, just in case you missed the announcement. There is a group train.
Check the announcements!
akagumo group
Comment has been collapsed.