The Great AH Census of Religion

Jaxxy

Strong atheist. Most of my family are agnostic, with one or two exceptions. That doesn't mean to say I don't have a spiritual side, because I do, it just has very little to do with religion.

philologos

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Strong atheist. Most of my family are agnostic, with one or two exceptions. That doesn't mean to say I don't have a spiritual side, because I do, it just has very little to do with religion.

Out of curiosity, what do you mean by spiritual? Does it involve the supernatural, or indeed a spirit / life-force, or?

Jaxxy

Jakkass wrote: »

Out of curiosity, what do you mean by spiritual? Does it involve the supernatural, or indeed a spirit / life-force, or?

No, nothing like that. I'd define my spirituality by discovering the deepest values and meanings by which I choose to live my life. Contemplation, meditation; gateways to a deeper understanding of the self. I have faith, but in myself and the people I love as opposed to anything divine or supernatural. Spirituality doesn't necessarily have to have religious connotations, or at least it doesn't for me.

Be good, kind, treat others how you would like to be treated, mutual respect, sure these are all things that are taught in the Bible, but they were also notions that were around long before the birth of Christ.

HavingCrack

aDeener wrote: »

I'm a member of The Church of The Latter Day Dude

Or how about the Church of the Fonz ?? :pac:

There's a religion we can all believe in!

philologos

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

No, nothing like that. I'd define my spirituality by discovering the deepest values and meanings by which I choose to live my life. Contemplation, meditation; gateways to a deeper understanding of the self. I have faith, but in myself and the people I love as opposed to anything divine or supernatural. Spirituality doesn't necessarily have to have religious connotations, or at least it doesn't for me.

I was just curious because usually spirituality has something to do with a spirit. Or I guess something which transcends the self (metaphysical). I guess it's one of those words that are in the eyes of the beholder.

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Be good, kind, treat others how you would like to be treated, mutual respect, sure these are all things that are taught in the Bible, but they were also notions that were around long before the birth of Christ.

Indeed they do predate Christ. I'd argue that He went much further than just to tell us to be good, kind etc etc, but that's another discussion I guess

Jaxxy

Jakkass wrote: »

I was just curious because usually spirituality has something to do with a spirit. Or I guess something which transcends the self (metaphysical). I guess it's one of those words that are in the eyes of the beholder.

This is very true. It has different meanings for different people, everyone has their own specific interpretation, I think that's the beauty of it. Some people equate the spirit to the notion of a "soul", something on which I've reflected a lot. I believe it to basically be a representation of the character of an individual, the essence of themselves so to speak, but nothing tangible or metaphysical. Self-discovery allows us to recognise the areas in our character, or "spirit", that we feel can be detrimental to ourselves or possibly improved upon.

I suppose, in a strange way, contemplation in this sense is a lot like prayer.

Jakkass wrote: »

Indeed they do predate Christ. I'd argue that He went much further than just to tell us to be good, kind etc etc, but that's another discussion I guess

It is indeed. Though I would go so far as to say that mutual goodness and kindness was perhaps one of the most important messages. But again, it's all relative and people will glean what they will from the teachings of the Bible.

MarkGrisham

Short reply: religion and the supernatural don't make sense. So no god methinks.

Long reply: eh, can't be bothered right now.

Charlie3dan

I'm a 6: de facto atheist.

I don't want to insult anyone with this but I don't think there's a more polite way to say what I think...
Personally, I think if you strongly follow any of the major religions, it's safe to assume you're an idiot or at least not someone I'd ever want to have to talk to to for any legnth of time.
I say "strongly follow" because that suggests you may have questioned it and somehow decided it is true or worthwhile....therefore idiot IMO.

If you are "A La Carte" then you basically need to look into it much deeper and have the courage to realise it's not worth hanging onto any of the religion.

Which just leaves god.....which is very separate to religion in my view.
If you can give a coherent reason to believe in God that doesn't invlove quoting religious books or dogma then fair play. I can't prove he doesn't exist and you can't prove he does so honestly it's up to you.
However, you must respect that I may not "feel" what you feel, or "experienced" your experience or "taken comfort" from what you've taken comfort from. Until I have these feelings/experiences or whatever I have no reason to believe in god.
I remain open to possibility I could be wrong and you should do the same but until then what we believe is what we believe.

philologos

Charlie3dan wrote: »

I don't want to insult anyone with this but I don't think there's a more polite way to say what I think...
Personally, I think if you strongly follow any of the major religions, it's safe to assume you're an idiot or at least not someone I'd ever want to have to talk to to for any length of time.
I say "strongly follow" because that suggests you may have questioned it and somehow decided it is true or worthwhile....therefore idiot IMO.

I'm glad I don't have such bigoted views in respect to who or who not I could befriend.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

Which just leaves god.....which is very separate to religion in my view.
If you can give a coherent reason to believe in God that doesn't invlove quoting religious books or dogma then fair play. I can't prove he doesn't exist and you can't prove he does so honestly it's up to you.

The point has been made by both atheists, and theists in this thread, that God cannot be absolutely proven or disproven. However, one can argue as to what makes one think that God's existence is more likely than not or vice versa in respect to atheism.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

However, you must respect that I may not "feel" what you feel, or "experienced" your experience or "taken comfort" from what you've taken comfort from.

It is very clear that you don't respect individuals who believe in God. Given this why must people respect your position?

I'd argue that people in general (I.E - including you) should (not of necessity), in general respect eachother for the most part and be willing to explore another's viewpoint. You don't seem very interested in doing this, considering that you've just called everyone who disagrees with you as to God's existence "an idiot".

By the by, taking comfort wouldn't be the main reason why I would believe. Rather it would be to do with what seems to be the truth rather than not.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

Until I have these feelings/experiences or whatever I have no reason to believe in god.

I would hope not. Placing your faith on mere experiences rather than on clear thought isn't a good idea.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

I remain open to possibility I could be wrong and you should do the same but until then what we believe is what we believe.

You clearly aren't open to the possibility though. Not one bit if you are going to proclaim people are idiots who just happen to disagree with you on God's existence!

Jeboa Safari

number 4, swaying between 3 and 5 depending the day

flinty34

I'm with the majority on this one...number 6.
Interesting poll

Charlie3dan

Jakkass wrote: »

I'm glad I don't have such bigoted views in respect to who or who not I could befriend.

I'm glad for you too.

Jakkass wrote: »

The point has been made by both atheists, and theists in this thread, that God cannot be absolutely proven or disproven. However, one can argue as to what makes one think that God's existence is more likely than not or vice versa in respect to atheism.

It is very clear that you don't respect individuals who believe in God. Given this why must people respect your position?

As has already been pointed out to you by another poster earlier in the thread, I respect anyone's right to a belief but I don't necessarily have to respect the belief itself. I'm only asking for the same level of respect.

Jakkass wrote: »

I'd argue that people in general (I.E - including you) should (not of necessity), in general respect eachother for the most part and be willing to explore another's viewpoint. You don't seem very interested in doing this, considering that you've just called everyone who disagrees with you as to God's existence "an idiot".

No Jackass, no. Read what I wrote
1: If you strongly believe in religion I think you're an idiot. Not if you believe in god....I went out of my way to make it clear.
2: I'm very open to exploring people's views and as I said I'm open to the possibility that I am wrong, but I have engaged in these discussions many times and I'm just trying to eliminate people arguing the petty points of religion with me when it really has no bearing on the existence of god.

Jakkass wrote: »

By the by, taking comfort wouldn't be the main reason why I would believe. Rather it would be to do with what seems to be the truth rather than not.

I would hope not. Placing your faith on mere experiences rather than on clear thought isn't a good idea.

You need to read what I wrote. I know you've probably heard many arguements before but don't assume I'm making the same ones.

Jakkass wrote: »

You clearly aren't open to the possibility though. Not one bit if you are going to proclaim people are idiots who just happen to disagree with you on God's existence!

Again, you need to read what I wrote.

philologos

Charlie3dan wrote: »

As has already been pointed out to you by another poster earlier in the thread, I respect anyone's right to a belief but I don't necessarily have to respect the belief itself. I'm only asking for the same level of respect.

Your post actually didn't criticise any belief but the individuals who hold that belief. You clearly don't respect the individuals rather than just their beliefs. You've effectively said that you wouldn't talk to anyone for any length of time if they happened to be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and so on and so forth. If I said that I wouldn't speak to a black person, or a homosexual for a certain period of time, that would be regarded as bigotry surely?

Charlie3dan wrote: »

No Jackass, no. Read what I wrote
1: If you strongly believe in religion I think you're an idiot. Not if you believe in god....I went out of my way to make it clear.

OK. In effect your statement is still absurd. If one believes in Christianity, one is effectively an idiot. If one believes in Judaism, one is effectively and idiot, etc etc.

From my perspective there is a difference between claiming that someone is effectively stupid for believing, and claiming that someone is misguided for doing so.

Pretty much how I would regard atheism. Misguided, but misguided about a pivotal point concerning reality. At the same time, I can see that many atheists are intelligent, just as many Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc are.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

2: I'm very open to exploring people's views and as I said I'm open to the possibility that I am wrong, but I have engaged in these discussions many times and I'm just trying to eliminate people arguing the petty points of religion with me when it really has no bearing on the existence of god.

Again, claiming someone is an idiot just because they disagree with you doesn't seem to be evidence that you are "open to the possibility that you are wrong".

seamus

Jakkass wrote: »

Your post actually didn't criticise any belief but the individuals who hold that belief. You clearly don't respect the individuals rather than just their beliefs. You've effectively said that you wouldn't talk to anyone for any length of time if they happened to be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and so on and so forth. If I said that I wouldn't speak to a black person, or a homosexual for a certain period of time, that would be regarded as bigotry surely?

You're twisting the meaning of his words into an ad hominem attack on him.

Perhaps it wasn't well said, but the spirit of his comment was such that he feels that someone of a very strong religious belief will be quite evangelistic or otherwise not on the same plane as him and therefore speaking to that person for any length of time would be a boring/disturbing/frustrating/farcical (delete as appropriate) conversation because the entire time would be spent with God references everywhere.

He didn't say that he wouldn't talk to to these people. Personally, I know that someone can have very strong religious beliefs and not proselytise, but I agree with the spirit of his statement - that I wouldn't spend much time talking to anyone who injected God into any conversation which wasn't a religious discussion

Max Power1

Charlie3dan wrote: »

I'm a 6: de facto atheist.

I don't want to insult anyone with this but I don't think there's a more polite way to say what I think...
Personally, I think if you strongly follow any of the major religions, it's safe to assume you're an idiot or at least not someone I'd ever want to have to talk to to for any legnth of time.
I say "strongly follow" because that suggests you may have questioned it and somehow decided it is true or worthwhile....therefore idiot IMO.

If you are "A La Carte" then you basically need to look into it much deeper and have the courage to realise it's not worth hanging onto any of the religion.

Which just leaves god.....which is very separate to religion in my view.
If you can give a coherent reason to believe in God that doesn't invlove quoting religious books or dogma then fair play. I can't prove he doesn't exist and you can't prove he does so honestly it's up to you.
However, you must respect that I may not "feel" what you feel, or "experienced" your experience or "taken comfort" from what you've taken comfort from. Until I have these feelings/experiences or whatever I have no reason to believe in god.
I remain open to possibility I could be wrong and you should do the same but until then what we believe is what we believe.

+1

This poster has word for word summed up my opinion to a T. Couldnt have put it better myself.

Charlie3dan

Jakkass wrote: »

Your post actually didn't criticise any belief but the individuals who hold that belief. You clearly don't respect the individuals rather than just their beliefs. You've effectively said that you wouldn't talk to anyone for any length of time if they happened to be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and so on and so forth. If I said that I wouldn't speak to a black person, or a homosexual for a certain period of time, that would be regarded as bigotry surely?

Well criticising the individual for holding the belief is criticising the belief really. See you're response actually backs up what I said about not wanting to talk to a believer for any length of time. We end up arguing whether or not I'm a good person rather than actually discussing the topic. Becuase what I said in relation to the topic is entirely reasonable, but you're strongest line here is to take something I said and try to make me look bigoted.

Jakkass wrote: »

OK. In effect your statement is still absurd. If one believes in Christianity, one is effectively an idiot. If one believes in Judaism, one is effectively and idiot, etc etc.

No as I said, I think God and religion are separate so my statement is not obsurd.

Jakkass wrote: »

From my perspective there is a difference between claiming that someone is effectively stupid for believing, and claiming that someone is misguided for doing so.

Pretty much how I would regard atheism. Misguided, but misguided about a pivotal point concerning reality. At the same time, I can see that many atheists are intelligent, just as many Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc are.

I don't consider all belief to be stupid. Again, that's not something I've said.

However, I do think that if you take the time to truly examine religion and look at both sides of the arguement, and still end up thinking that religion is the correct side to be on.....well then yes, in my opinion it's not just misguided, that doesn't quite cut it, there is something actually wrong somewhere.
In some cases the person maybe and an idiot or at the very least, not a person I really want to have a pint with on a saturday.

That's from my experience thus far, as I say I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong and I'll give everyone of yis a chance so that's not bigotry, that's an opinion based on my experience.

carvaggio

Personally I've always found the idea of religion a bit silly, though I can understand why so many people were taken in with it throughout the centuries.

I sometimes hear people saying that science has no believable explanation for how the universe began, but then I always wonder what would be the Christian explanation for where god appeared from. Did he just pop along one day billions of years ago or something, and how was he created?

Max Power1

carvaggio wrote: »

Personally I've always found the idea of religion a bit silly, though I can understand why so many people were taken in with it throughout the centuries.

I sometimes hear people saying that science has no believable explanation for how the universe began, but then I always wonder what would be the Christian explanation for where god appeared from. Did he just pop along one day billions of years ago or something, and how was he created?

He's magic and created himself, or he was always there.

Depends on which christian you speak to. Both answers are equally illogical.

Star Bingo

ok technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. but not really leaning cos personally i need to believe there is a higher power to bow down to respect n so forth so i have to remain agnostic in a sense.. just refuse to believe its in the human image that strikes me as human vanity, the sense of superiority/ownership which will ultimately destroy the planet that grants us life. so in effect this our immediate god in the absence of one.. - yeah i'll settle for that.

philologos

Charlie3dan wrote: »

Well criticising the individual for holding the belief is criticising the belief really. See you're response actually backs up what I said about not wanting to talk to a believer for any length of time. We end up arguing whether or not I'm a good person rather than actually discussing the topic. Becuase what I said in relation to the topic is entirely reasonable, but you're strongest line here is to take something I said and try to make me look bigoted.

Well, I'm actually being as fair as I can. If anyone said that about any demographic, particularly in respect to minorities, people would more likely than not regard it as being seriously bigoted.

The comment just comes across as abnormal. Personally when I meet people I tend to assess them on their character rather than on what they believe in, whether that be in God, a god, or gods or being atheist and agnostic.

I don't believe it was reasonable in the slightest. Hence why I've referred to it.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

No as I said, I think God and religion are separate so my statement is not obsurd.

If Judaism, Hinduism, Islam and Chrisitanity aren't religions what are? Or are you referring to denominations?

Charlie3dan wrote: »

I don't consider all belief to be stupid. Again, that's not something I've said.

You've said rather clearly that believing according to the tenets of a given faith, or religion is stupid.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

However, I do think that if you take the time to truly examine religion and look at both sides of the arguement, and still end up thinking that religion is the correct side to be on.....well then yes, in my opinion it's not just misguided, that doesn't quite cut it, there is something actually wrong somewhere.
In some cases the person maybe and an idiot or at the very least, not a person I really want to have a pint with on a saturday.

I've taken quite a bit of time examining my faith throughout my life. I'm one of those people whom you consider an idiot. I find it amazing that you can just dismiss people based on what they believe in.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

That's from my experience thus far, as I say I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong and I'll give everyone of yis a chance so that's not bigotry, that's an opinion based on my experience.

It's pretty much the same as if I said, from my experience of black people, I personally wouldn't really want to talk to them for any length of time because they're idiots.

What you are calling "experience" is stereotyping.

philologos

seamus wrote: »

Perhaps it wasn't well said, but the spirit of his comment was such that he feels that someone of a very strong religious belief will be quite evangelistic or otherwise not on the same plane as him and therefore speaking to that person for any length of time would be a boring/disturbing/frustrating/farcical (delete as appropriate) conversation because the entire time would be spent with God references everywhere.

If that was what was being said, I understand that. None of this context was given in the actual post. He goes further than that in his latest response to me though if you read it.

g5fd6ow0hseima

Jakkass wrote: »

I've taken quite a bit of time examining my faith throughout my life. I'm one of those people whom you consider an idiot. I find it amazing that you can just dismiss people based on what they believe in.

I will agree it's a bit harsh to call believers idiots but you can see the angle that he's coming from. I dont want to put words in his mouth but there's something lacking upstairs when people need fairy tales to guide themselves through life - especially in the modern era.

Dave!

I'm a 6, for the reasons given by everyone else...

Just discovered that OutlawPete is not just a anti-vaccine nut person, but an evolution denialist to boot! The mind boggles! Well actually it makes a bit of sense -- if one of these is true for a person, then it's not that surprising that the other is too.

Charlie3dan

Jakkass wrote: »

Well, I'm actually being as fair as I can. If anyone said that about any demographic, particularly in respect to minorities, people would more likely than not regard it as being seriously bigoted.

The comment just comes across as abnormal. Personally when I meet people I tend to assess them on their character rather than on what they believe in, whether that be in God, a god, or gods or being atheist and agnostic.

I don't believe it was reasonable in the slightest. Hence why I've referred to it.

I assess people on their full character too but more often than not, strong belief in a religion equals not my type of person or an actual idiot. I'm still talking to religious people and still waiting to be proven wrong.

In any case, go ahead and call me a bigot or a bad person or whatever if you like, I don't care. I'd be happy to discuss the actual topic of the the thread too if you'd care to contribute to that.

Jakkass wrote: »

If Judaism, Hinduism, Islam and Chrisitanity aren't religions what are? Or are you referring to denominations?

No the statement you said was absurd is not absurd because I clarified that religion and god were separate things to me. What followed that in your post was nonsense.
To address the above, strong followers of any of the above, yes I think are idiots/ people I won't want to spend time with.

Jakkass wrote: »

You've said rather clearly that believing according to the tenets of a given faith, or religion is stupid.

Yes, I'm saying strong belief in religion is stupid. I did not say moderates and a la cartes are stupid. I did not say belief in a god is stupid. So please don't suggest otherwise.
Many people who may even call themselves part of a religion are actually moderate or a la carte. If that's the case see my comments in my first post.
But if you are actually hardline religious, fully aware of the arguements for both sides and still follow and defend a religion, that is what I call an idiot or a person I don't want to spend much time with.

Jakkass wrote: »

I've taken quite a bit of time examining my faith throughout my life. I'm one of those people whom you consider an idiot. I find it amazing that you can just dismiss people based on what they believe in.

It's pretty much the same as if I said, from my experience of black people, I personally wouldn't really want to talk to them for any length of time because they're idiots.

What you are calling "experience" is stereotyping.

All generalisations are inaccurate, including this one.

I don't discriminate against people, deny rights to them, segregate them etc etc etc. However, I do make opinions of people based n my interactions with them.

But like I say, call me a bigot all day long if you wish. You'll be wrong on it but go ahead. I'll try and pick out anything that is actually relevant to the topic from your posts.

philologos

Charlie3dan wrote: »

But if you are actually hardline religious, fully aware of the arguements for both sides and still follow and defend a religion, that is what I call an idiot or a person I don't want to spend much time with.

I wouldn't call myself "hardline". I'd call myself someone who takes Christianity seriously. What if people have gone through a lot of the arguments against their faith, and find them absolutely inadequate. That's pretty much where I am right now. I just think that atheism is non-sensical and illogical in comparison to Christianity. The case for Christianity, as I see it is simply stronger.

Now, is my Christianity something I'd bang on about 24/7. No, certainly not, there are other things in life to talk about. Is it something that arises in general (off-Boards) conversation? - Yes it is. Mostly because other people seem to be quite interested in what I believe. Do I find such conversations valuable? - Yes, such conversations break down barriers between people, and allow others to step into your shoes and you into theirs.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

But like I say, call me a bigot all day long if you wish. You'll be wrong on it but go ahead. I'll try and pick out anything that is actually relevant to the topic from your posts.

I just think that your current position is absolutely tragic.

Charlie3dan

Jakkass wrote: »

I wouldn't call myself "hardline". I'd call myself someone who takes Christianity seriously. What if people have gone through a lot of the arguments against their faith, and find them absolutely inadequate. That's pretty much where I am right now. I just think that atheism is non-sensical and illogical in comparison to Christianity. The case for Christianity, as I see it is simply stronger.

And do you accept all aspects of Christianity to the letter?
Out of curiosity?

Jakkass wrote: »

I just think that your current position is absolutely tragic.

And I can understand why you might think that and I don't mind you having that opinion of me. After much consideration and thought on the subject I find it to be the position that serves me best.
If someone can offer me something valid to change my mind I'm all ears.

(I'm not directing this at you Jackass but I'm just adding a few comments to clarify what I said in my first post)

I don't set out to offend but I actually look at hardline believers and can't fathom what goes on in their heads.
I don't think it's strong enough to simply say they are misguided I think it actually needs to be explicitly stated that there is utter madness involved in religion.
We've accepted the power of the church in this country blinding for far too long and even now atheism is seen by some as akin to Devil worship.
So yes, I will go as far as to use the word idiots and I think I have to in order to accurately convey my feelings.

sheesh

I don't believe in god but still think religion is important.

I would still have alot of time for the rc church on a local level.

I don't understand people on this thread's smug attitude to people who believe.

I can understand the anger towards the Catholic church.

ScissorPaperRock

Jakkass wrote: »

I just think that atheism is non-sensical and illogical in comparison to Christianity.

I just can't get my head around this. I mean I can tell that you're a logical thinker from your posts here and in other threads, but I can't see how logical thinking can be the basis of someone's faith.

I'm a 6.

philologos

Charlie3dan wrote: »

And do you accept all aspects of Christianity to the letter?
Out of curiosity?

I believe in God as Creator, and I believe that Jesus Christ came to die for our sins, to bring us back to Him. I believe that the Holy Spirit is with us, and guides us in this current existence. I believe that Jesus will return, and I believe that He will judge both the living and the dead.

I pretty much hold to all the main tenets of Christian faith, which have mostly arisen out of a good bit of reading and research. It's been an interesting and exciting process.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

And I can understand why you might think that and I don't mind you having that opinion of me. After much consideration and thought on the subject I find it to be the position that serves me best.
If someone can offer me something valid to change my mind I'm all ears.

All in reality that differs between you and I and this applies for the other atheists on this forum, is that I acknowledge God's existence as being a key part of reality. I'll admit that this affects my life to a large degree, but at the end of the day I am a human like you, or people of any other degree of conviction.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

I don't set out to offend but I actually look at hardline believers and can't fathom what goes on in their heads.
I don't think it's strong enough to simply say they are misguided I think it actually needs to be explicitly stated that there is utter madness involved in religion.

How do you explain incredibly intelligent people who happen to believe in Christianity, Judaism, Islam or any other faith? I would put it down to the fact that intelligence is something that anyone can have irrespective of faith.

Charlie3dan wrote: »

We've accepted the power of the church in this country blinding for far too long and even now atheism is seen by some as akin to Devil worship.

You do realise that the RCC isn't the only church in Ireland?

Charlie3dan wrote: »

So yes, I will go as far as to use the word idiots and I think I have to in order to accurately convey my feelings.

The evidence seems to suggest that a large number of believers who take their faith seriously are actually quite intelligent.

MagicMarker

sheesh wrote: »

I don't believe in god but still think religion is important.

I would still have alot of time for the rc church on a local level.

I don't understand people on this thread's smug attitude to people who believe.

I can understand the anger towards the Catholic church.