Complaint about haunted bread on Late Late Show

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

An Atheist would have no truck with religion or anything to do with religion and those people I do respect.

Yet that is your definition of "atheist" and no one else's. Atheism is related mostly to non-belief in your claims there is a god. Nothing more. In fact I personally wish the word had been adeism and it is one of the many reasons I do not use the word atheist to identify myself.

There is nothing about atheism that means you need to have nothing at all to do with religion.

In fact if the "Clergy Project" has told us anything, it is that a lot of the clergy working in religion are atheists themselves. And I genuinely wonder how many Christians doing all the ceremonies and partaking in the social aspects of their religion hobby of choice, actually do believe any of it.

People like ceremony, ritual, routine and atheists are no different. And religion is one provider who offers products that feed that need.

realdanbreen wrote: »

Really? Why don't you track down a genuine atheist and ask him/her.

You are on a forum full of them, and they are giving you answers on it. That you simply ignore those answers, like you have ignored my posts from yesterday, does not magically mean the answers are not there.

I suspect you just hear the answers you want to hear, and filter out the ones that do not match what YOU have decided the answers should be.

realdanbreen wrote: »

Absolutely. Atheists are of course free as a breeze to do as they wish unlike the situation in Atheist States like North Korea where those practising religion are persecuted.

The problem in those states, which I had to school the Valeyard on too if you want links to that discussion, is not that the state wants people to be atheist and not practice relgiion...... but that the state has a form of State Religion.

And if we know one thing about religions and gods (Check out the 10 commandments if you do not believe me, where false belief is specifically mentioned but NON belief is not mentioned AT ALL).... is that they are uniquely jealous and paranoid about OTHER religion.

North Korea is one short of a trinity. It is a state with an "Eternal" leader, who has semi reincarnated himself in his own son. Sounds pretty Christian in narrative to me, as they have a similar story. And their narrative includes Miracles, like the birds singing in Korean and all that "lark" (pun intended).

People are not persecuted there for practicing religion therefore, they are persecuted for practicing the WRONG religion.

If you think that sounds at all like "atheism" then your definition of "atheism" is even more skewed than your earlier posts on this thread already show it to be.

realdanbreen

robindch wrote: »

Wasn't there one of the commandments about not bearing false witness against your neighbour? :rolleyes:

Can't remember if the Vatican took it off the books though.

Seriously, from looking at previous posts of yours it is really impressive how much knowledge you have of all things religious. It is almost weird actually how you as an atheist appear to be way more knowledgeable and dare I say interested in religion than I as a believer am.

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

Seriously, from looking at previous posts of yours it is really impressive how much knowledge you have of all things religious. It is almost weird actually how you as an atheist appear to be way more knowledgeable and dare I say interested in religion than I as a believer am.

Not weird at all. This is a well known phenomenon and there have been studies in the US for example showing atheists tend to know the details of the religious books and beliefs than the people who (claim to) actually follow that religion.

One of the many reasons I am not sure how many believers ACTUALLY believe. Because I know damn well of myself that if I thought there was a creator of the universe, and that my eternal well being was at it's whim, and he gave us an instruction manual like the bible........ I would know the details of it inside out.

My favorite example was when I collected consecrated hosts for scientific experimentation, I met many many Catholics. And they were entirely divided on what they though catholic belief on the crackers actually was. Many thought it was a symbolic only ceremony with no alteration to the crackers, others thought there was a spiritual but real alteration to the crackers, while others (the ones my "studies" were directed at, thought there was an actual physical real world change to the crackers.

One of the most important ceremonies in their religion, and they do not seem to care to work out the details of what is actually going on in it. Seem odd at all to you?

So funny you (falsely) accusing atheists of not following their convictions. Huge swaths of apparent believers do not appear to care much for theirs.

Peregrinus

Why shouldn't an atheist be interested in, and knowledgeable about, religion?

The way I see it, a believer who's uninterested in religion requires a lot more explanation than an atheist who's interested in it.

realdanbreen

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Yet that is your definition of "atheist" and no one else's. Atheism is related mostly to non-belief in your claims there is a god. Nothing more. In fact I personally wish the word had been adeism and it is one of the many reasons I do not use the word atheist to identify myself.

There is nothing about atheism that means you need to have nothing at all to do with religion.

In fact if the "Clergy Project" has told us anything, it is that a lot of the clergy working in religion are atheists themselves. And I genuinely wonder how many Christians doing all the ceremonies and partaking in the social aspects of their religion hobby of choice, actually do believe any of it.

People like ceremony, ritual, routine and atheists are no different. And religion is one provider who offers products that feed that need.



You are on a forum full of them, and they are giving you answers on it. That you simply ignore those answers, like you have ignored my posts from yesterday, does not magically mean the answers are not there.

I suspect you just hear the answers you want to hear, and filter out the ones that do not match what YOU have decided the answers should be.



The problem in those states, which I had to school the Valeyard on too if you want links to that discussion, is not that the state wants people to be atheist and not practice relgiion...... but that the state has a form of State Religion.

And if we know one thing about religions and gods (Check out the 10 commandments if you do not believe me, where false belief is specifically mentioned but NON belief is not mentioned AT ALL).... is that they are uniquely jealous and paranoid about OTHER religion.

North Korea is one short of a trinity. It is a state with an "Eternal" leader, who has semi reincarnated himself in his own son. Sounds pretty Christian in narrative to me, as they have a similar story. And their narrative includes Miracles, like the birds singing in Korean and all that "lark" (pun intended).

People are not persecuted there for practicing religion therefore, they are persecuted for practicing the WRONG religion.

If you think that sounds at all like "atheism" then your definition of "atheism" is even more skewed than your earlier posts on this thread already show it to be.

You mention that I ignore and refuse to answer your posts but I have pointed out to you several times that I rarely read posts that go beyond 6 or 7 lines or 10 or 12 inches in your case, on any topic. I also, and it's not you it's me , don't really have the time to try and decipher what exactly you are saying. EG I simply pointed out that religious expression is persecuted in North Korea and you went off on one about 'schooling the valeyard' or whatever.

realdanbreen

Peregrinus wrote: »

Why shouldn't an atheist be interested in, and knowledgeable about, religion?

The way I see it, a believer who's uninterested in religion requires a lot more explanation than an atheist who's interested in it.

You do understand that there is a difference between having a belief and being religious?

realdanbreen

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

My favorite example was when I collected consecrated hosts for scientific experimentation.

OK, OK, I surrender! :rolleyes:

.......

This post has been deleted.

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

I rarely read posts that go beyond 6 or 7 lines

Yet given you claim not to read any such posts, you are always able to reference bits of them that are directly in the middle of them. Which, without having read them, you could not do.

So I simply do not believe your claim.

realdanbreen wrote: »

I simply pointed out that religious expression is persecuted in North Korea and you went off on one about 'schooling the valeyard' or whatever.

Not reading my posts is one thing, but misrepresenting them with tiny select bits is pretty poor form indeed.

The VAST majority of my post said no such thing, but in fact explained how people there are not being persecuted for religious expression, but for investing in the WRONG religion(s).

My points are straight forward. That you think they need to be "deciphered" is just a(nother) transparent dodge by you.

You are well able to read my posts, and are well able to ignore the bits you simply can not reply to.

realdanbreen wrote: »

You do understand that there is a difference between having a belief and being religious?

The question is do YOU understand that, because understanding that would be useful in your "atheists going to religious ceremonies" narrative. You think atheist beliefs somehow should preclude them (if they were committed to their ideals or whatever you have invented today) from doing so.

But there is a difference between belief and being religious. And so you have essentially rebutted yourself here by acknowledging that.

Shoot yourself in the foot much, or just on this forum?

smacl

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Atheists can have plenty of beliefs, just so long as they don't include the existence of a God or gods. e.g. I know an atheist homeopath, and have found on a number of occasions that recent atheists will substitute other specious nonsense for the god they once worshipped. Similarly, they can be religious, as per Nozz's reference to clergy who've lost faith. The word atheist has a limited and explicit definition, and in my opinion does not benefit from being extended to include anything beyond that definition.

.......

This post has been deleted.

kylith

realdanbreen wrote: »

Seriously, from looking at previous posts of yours it is really impressive how much knowledge you have of all things religious. It is almost weird actually how you as an atheist appear to be way more knowledgeable and dare I say interested in religion than I as a believer am.

My brother said this to me once. I can only say to you what I said to him: "YEs, I know a lot about religion. Why do you think I'm an atheist?"

And, as said upthread; if an atheist knows more about religion than a believer, what does that say about that believer?

realdanbreen

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Yet given you claim not to read any such posts, you are always able to reference bits of them that are directly in the middle of them. Which, without having read them, you could not do.

So I simply do not believe your claim.



Not reading my posts is one thing, but misrepresenting them with tiny select bits is pretty poor form indeed.

The VAST majority of my post said no such thing, but in fact explained how people there are not being persecuted for religious expression, but for investing in the WRONG religion(s).

My points are straight forward. That you think they need to be "deciphered" is just a(nother) transparent dodge by you.

You are well able to read my posts, and are well able to ignore the bits you simply can not reply to.



The question is do YOU understand that, because understanding that would be useful in your "atheists going to religious ceremonies" narrative. You think atheist beliefs somehow should preclude them (if they were committed to their ideals or whatever you have invented today) from doing so.

But there is a difference between belief and being religious. And so you have essentially rebutted yourself here by acknowledging that.

Shoot yourself in the foot much, or just on this forum?

It's ironic that you are having a pop at me for not responding to your posts when I am in fact one of the few round here that does engage with you.
Perhaps the fact that you previously stated that you have a penchant for reporting posts to the mods might explain that lack of engagement.

Peregrinus

realdanbreen wrote: »

You do understand that there is a difference between having a belief and being religious?

I do. But having a belief in god can be expected to lead someone to be interested in religion since religion is, basically, the way a belief in god affects our lives, relationshiops, actions, etc. So if somebody believes in god but has no interest in how that belief plays out in their own life or anybody else's , yeah, I do think that calls for at least some explanation. It's a bit like saying "I believe in a woman's right to choose, but have absolutely no interest in the state of abortion law/the provision of abortion services in Ireland". If you believe in a woman's right to choose (or indeed in the right to life of the unborn) then you should be interested in those things, shouldn't you?

Whereas somebody who has no belief in god can certainly be interested in religion as a social, historical, cultural, etc phenomenon. There's nothing remotely surprising about that.

nozzferrahhtoo

kylith wrote: »

My brother said this to me once. I can only say to you what I said to him: "YEs, I know a lot about religion. Why do you think I'm an atheist?"

Yea, interestingly I have never converted many people away from religion. But those that I DID convert few of them were from rational attempts to dissuade them from their belief.

Rather the vast majority were the result of me sitting down with them, buying them a bible (because despite their alleged beliefs they did not even bother to own one) and teaching them exactly what it is they were claiming to believe.

And nearly every person I did that with basically ended up saying "I am meant to believe WHAT? Yea no thanks" and basically left the church and faith entirely.

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

It's ironic that you are having a pop at me for not responding to your posts when I am in fact one of the few round here that does engage with you.

Hitting "reply" on my post does not constitute engaging with me.

Actually dealing with the points and arguments IN my posts does.

This you have not done yet. At all. Least of all on this thread.

But if you want to reply to any of my points, they are there.

storker

realdanbreen wrote: »

Absolutely. Atheists are of course free as a breeze to do as they wish unlike the situation in Atheist States like North Korea where those practising religion are persecuted.

Clutching at straws I see. Those are actually Communist states, who happen to be atheist. I would draw your attention to the fact that they are ruled by "The Communist Party" and not "The Atheist Party." There are enough of atheist liberals and conservatives to put to bed the notion that atheism requires persecution of the religious. Do you really want to go down the road of looking back at the actions of states ruled by believers?

Oh, and thank you for your tacit admission that your definition of atheism was in fact a hallucination.

realdanbreen

OK, I have run out of interest so to wind things up on my part; you guys may be content in the knowledge that on this Earth you have as much significance and fulfilment and expectations as Shep the dog or Daisy the cow whereas I
don't.

Samaris

realdanbreen wrote: »

Of course I would because I believe in a higher power. I would not however attend any religious ceremony if I was a genuine atheist and I would most certainly not be that lily livered that I would attend in order to please parents or parents in law as many have said they do on the A&Aforums.

I would not do this therefore no real one of these things that I am not would do it either. Logic!


The next two pages caused a certain amount of laughing into my tea as well as eye-rolling. Realdanbreen, you really don't seem to understand what an atheist is, let alone how the mass hive-mind you seem to think exists should or would act. First clue - not a hive-mind. Some people become atheists because they have no real interest in religion, some become atheists because they were very much interested in religion, realised that there was an awful lot of nonsense in there too and read a lot to make up their own minds. Others rebelled against very religious upbringings, others never had religion in their upbringing. Etcetera. Do you not see why any of these factors would influence...y'know, different individual humans to have different individual ideas and attach differing levels of importance to their own lack of belief in a god of any sort?

I suppose the shortest explanation is "not all atheists are going to be exactly like an atheist realdanbreen." but it's always a bit worrying when it has to be explained that a huge swathe of people are not going to be identical in how they express themselves or what they give a flying about.

It is interesting that you would choose to be...well, "religious" in your expression of how atheist you are. To you, it would appear that the most important thing is that everyone know your beliefs (or lack thereof in this context), that your (lack of) belief is the most important thing that people should know. Therefore, you would not step foot in a Church (although current religious realdanbreen is okay with going into places of worship for other religions, so you may need to square that circle a tad) despite it being important to family members or whatever. Your religious outlook is more important than your social or family outlook. You also take a tribal stance - you are with us or against us, you are part of us or not part of us and you must adhere to my ideas of how to show you are one of us or you are not an atheist. Pure, nonsensical religious tribalism at work there. Get on away out of that. Some of us probably got out of religion to get away from groupthink like that!

I mean, sure, okay, whatever, your choice, but not all atheists feel the need to express their lack of belief in a religious fashion. To some it may well be of deathless importance to never set foot in a Catholic institution, to others, they will go if it's something important to someone they care about and don't feel any particular risk of a) bursting into flames, b) being reconverted or c) what others will think of them.


Religious atheists - worst of both worlds.

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

OK, I have run out of interest so to wind things up on my part; you guys may be content in the knowledge that on this Earth you have as much significance and fulfilment and expectations as Shep the dog or Daisy the cow whereas I don't.

Nothing wrong with that. And it is good you are so honest about the source of your biases........ basically that you believe things to be true because the implications of that "truth" please you more than the reality.

Many atheists feel the same, and they are NOT happy with the apparent fact that life is in and of itself insignificant, finite, and meaningless. But they find meaning in their own life all the same.

The problem starts when, having decided you do not like reality, you invent narratives of unsubstantiated nonsense to paper mache over the bits you do not like.

Whether it be selectively reading the posts that please you, selectively misinterpreting the bits of posts you do not like, or imagining there to be a god or an after life......... the result is the same. You are making yourself happier by pretending reality is other than it is.

Samaris

Maybe the easiest way to put this (in 10 sentences or less) is in a manner representative of the Ten Commandments.

The Ten Commandments According To Atheism.

1. First you don't believe in a Lord your God and no other gods shall cause a problem as you don't believe in them either.
2-10. See 1.

That's basically it. Nothing about how you should express it. Nothing about how you should go about avoiding it. Nothing about fasting on weekdays to improve your lack of connection with a god. Lack of belief. This isn't difficult. The End.

smacl

realdanbreen wrote: »

OK, I have run out of interest so to wind things up on my part; you guys may be content in the knowledge that on this Earth you have as much significance and fulfilment and expectations as Shep the dog or Daisy the cow whereas I
don't.

Don't be so hard on yourself Dan. I'm sure you've just as much significance as Daisy the cow. Shep's dead. :pac:

storker

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Many atheists feel the same, and they are NOT happy with the apparent fact that life is in and of itself insignificant, finite, and meaningless.

What bothers this atheist even more than that is believing that one day I'll stop existing, which I'm not exactly mad about. I'm also bothered that I'll never know the answers to so many of the big questions of history and science. And it also bothers me that evil people will never see punishment or retribution. I've heard it claimed that atheism is some kind of easy option. I don't find it easy at all.

Actually the whole meaning of life thing doesn't bother me that much. It just is what it is. We're here because we're here...

kylith

Samaris wrote: »

Maybe the easiest way to put this (in 10 sentences or less) is in a manner representative of the Ten Commandments.

The Ten Commandments According To Atheism.

1. First you don't believe in a Lord your God and no other gods shall cause a problem as you don't believe in them either.
2-10. See 1.

That's basically it. Nothing about how you should express it. Nothing about how you should go about avoiding it. Nothing about fasting on weekdays to improve your lack of connection with a god. Lack of belief. This isn't difficult. The End.

Actually, I prefer to go by the One Commandment: Be Excellent to Each Other *air guitar*

Samaris

kylith wrote: »

Actually, I prefer to go by the One Commandment: Be Excellent to Each Other *air guitar*

True, and same, but not necessary to just be an atheist. No moral implications or judgement, merely do not have a belief in a god. Being excellent or being a dick to others has nothing to do with atheism - given the confusion going on up above about what makes an atheist "real" or not, simplest is probably best as a starting point!

I will join you in *air guitar* though.

realdanbreen

storker wrote: »

Actually the whole meaning of life thing doesn't bother me that much. It just is what it is. We're here because we're here...

And that in my opinion sums up the basis and research for 90% of the minority of the population who regards themselves as atheist.

storker

realdanbreen wrote: »

And that in my opinion sums up the basis and research for 90% of the minority of the population who regards themselves as atheist.

Well I'd be interested to know where you got that 90% from, and I'd be careful about drawing any conclusions regarding the morality or otherwise of those with that attitude.

Samaris

realdanbreen wrote: »

And that in my opinion sums up the basis and research for 90% of the minority of the population who regards themselves as atheist.

90% of statistics are made up on the spot and always look dubious when they're conveniently a round number.

looksee

realdanbreen wrote: »

And that in my opinion sums up the basis and research for 90% of the minority of the population who regards themselves as atheist.

Well if the meaning of life is to spend it hassling and worrying about what happens in the next one then I think I will go with the 'this is it, make the most of it' argument. And making the most of it in no way implies 'immorality'.

realdanbreen

storker wrote: »

Well I'd be interested to know where you got that 90% from, and I'd be careful about drawing any conclusions regarding the morality or otherwise of those with that attitude.

What part of 'in my opinion' did you not understand and I never mentioned morality you did.