You’re not atheists.

[Little_Birdie]

according to catholic doctrine, a theologan's view of athisim, there are two forms one who hates god or one who denies his existance so it would seem that from the perseptive of each beliver an atheist is someone not beliving in their god as what they belive is truth to them, as for a coliqual defination i feel the trem has been around to long and has so many meanings to so many different people the term must be personly defined by the one using it to desride himself its almost like there are sects of atheism

 

[Crunchy Cat]

That is only if you have preconceived notions about people. In reality, I suspect you don't even understand your own thought processes.

I prefer to let people pre-conceive their own notions about themselves and see how they identify with known concepts. As for my thought process, I have consciousness that maintains an active conceptual geometry that is under continuous modeling throught my life. I feed that geometry information which to the best of my understanding correlates to reality. I use my subconscious to focus on any activity as it's able to access my conceptual geometry and incoming information with much greater volume and speed than my consciousness. Depending on the situation, my subconscious may elicit an emotional flag (ex. something is wrong) to my consciousness for some active analysis.

Nice and neatly described, and in all likelihood false. I have read this nonsense before in a psychology book - it classified thought processes as "logical", "theological", and something else I can't remember. It's an outdated theory of cognition which never had much recognition to start with.

There is no such thing as "critical thinker" and "believer" as distinct personalities. Everyone is a bit of both, and often both at the same time. An atheist who goes through a religious experience will have a hard time remaining an atheist. A believer who goes through enough tribulation in life, like Job in the bible, will have a hard time keeping his faith in a loving God.

It wasn't meant to be an assertion of truth. It was meant to exemplify how someone whom finds it difficult to manage attributes of absence can turn it around into attributes of presence.

I have seen too many times the claim, by atheists, that religion divides people, but if anything religion unites people. All members of a church are united in their beliefs and their rituals. What divides people is the notion that some people are better than others. That notion is as popular with believers and skeptics alike, but it's not an easy notion to get rid of.

The very fact that there are thousands of religions in existance (ex. Jews, Christains, and Wiccans) and within each one there are multiple sects (ex. protestants, menanites, and catholics) shows that religion also has great division which are utterly inflexible. It's not my opinion that religions are responsible for such divisions. It's people. Humans are great at detecting / creating difference and gravitate towards similarity (every wonder why high school students all try to look the same)?. In other words they naturally segregate. Humans are also naturally heirarchical. If you find 10 people in any particular segregation, they will segregate amongst themselves with respect to social dominance. Religion is a manifestation of this behavior and any corresponding problems... but certainly not the source. IMO, segregation and heirarchy should be promoted in a healthy, flexible, and non-destructive manner. With that kind of infrastructure, hypothetically people will unite and divide dynamically in size, speed, and as necessary.

 

[Hapsburg]

Is it not contemporary theory that photons do not have mass?

I could be wrong.

A photon is just light. It and other forms of light energy are still matter, more or less, just converted into pure energy and expressed as light. So...photons were matter, and they're in a transitional form.
...I think...

 

[Medicine*Woman]

according to catholic doctrine, a theologan's view of athisim, there are two forms one who hates god or one who denies his existance so it would seem that from the perseptive of each beliver an atheist is someone not beliving in their god as what they belive is truth to them, as for a coliqual defination i feel the trem has been around to long and has so many meanings to so many different people the term must be personly defined by the one using it to desride himself its almost like there are sects of atheism

*************
M*W: Oh, the semantics of it! Catholic doctrine is false and it breeds falsehoods. Atheists do not "hate god." Atheists "deny its existence." Atheists do not have "a god," so using the possessive pronoun "there" is incorrect. There are no "sects" of atheism. There are no gods, therefore, there are no believers.

 

[baumgarten]

A photon is just light. It and other forms of light energy are still matter, more or less, just converted into pure energy and expressed as light. So...photons were matter, and they're in a transitional form.
...I think...

Sort of. Matter and energy are really the same thing: E=mc^2

 

[Little_Birdie]

i was just trying to understand the specific forms of atheism in this forum, as everyone seems to be coming from a different place and expecting it to be the same, i think we need to broadly define atheism and then divide it into subsections based on each indavidual's personal definition; i think as broad as we can go is to say... what exactly do you think

 

[Possumking]

An atheist does not believe in the existence of a theistic god (i.e. creator). An atheist is still free to believe (if they wanted) in a number of other unseen things eg ghosts, non-creator gods, devas, angels, spiritual beings, reincarnation, souls, etc etc etc.

Now I know many of you who class yourselves as atheist would never entertain belief in any of these things…. So why class yourselves as atheists? Someone who does not believe in anything spiritual – in anything that cannot be objectively and physically proven is called a materialist.

I wish people would state their position correctly. If you are a materialist please call yourself such – if you are an atheist that’s fine, say atheist.

(its just a little bugbear of mine :bugeye: )

Who are you to define what an atheist is?

 

[Meathead]

A photon is just light. It and other forms of light energy are still matter, more or less, just converted into pure energy and expressed as light. So...photons were matter, and they're in a transitional form.
...I think...

Were and is are completely different. Having had mass is not having mass.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

This might just be faulty memory, but I could have sworn seeing it theorized that photons might have rest mass... ya just dont see it because they don't seem to rest.

 

[Meathead]

That's not faulty memory, you've got it right as far I remember aswell.

 

[Roman]

The description "athest" says far more about someone than "Roman Catholic" if you're willing to think.

No, not at all. Atheist simply means one without a god. It doesn't imply that they don't believe in spirits or the like.

Among the many bits of information that can be obtained is that the atheist has his/her Sundays freed up for activities that don't include satisfying supernatural agents.

What about the atheist that spends her sunday alone, meditating, making her chi energy positive?

 

[staples disconnected]

I have studied Buddhism, out of curiosity, and was quite surprised with two aspects of the religion: its utter pessimism, and its unbelievable complexity. I'm not sure about the former; maybe the religion is complex enough to hide its optimism. Whatever the case, what left me puzzled was, how could such a complex and, at least on the surface, so pessimistic a religion be so popular.

I came across the answer recently: someone claimed that most Buddhists don't really understand their religion. That is why they believe in gods and spiritual beings and what not. I feel almost tempted to say most Buddhists, if they really understood Buddhism, would promptly be converted to Christianity. But that would be an awful thing to say.

Interestingly, properly practicing Buddhists were found to be the happiest people on the earth. Something to do with being able to, through their meditations, activate the left-prefrontal lobe.

What does that mean? Even if you think it is pessimistic, it's followers clearly are not. Why you assume they would immediately convert to christianity seems retarded. Who wants to follow an absolute prick of a god, when you could be happy?

 

[SkinWalker]

What about the atheist that spends her sunday alone, meditating, making her chi energy positive?

Or what about the atheist that spends her Sundays alone, baking bread and pies. Neither she nor the meditator are wasting time in church.

 

[(Q)]

]

Nice and neatly described, and in all likelihood false. I have read this nonsense before in a psychology book - it classified thought processes as "logical", "theological", and something else I can't remember. It's an outdated theory of cognition which never had much recognition to start with.

Then, you admit to never using critical thinking?

There is no such thing as "critical thinker" and "believer" as distinct personalities. Everyone is a bit of both, and often both at the same time. An atheist who goes through a religious experience will have a hard time remaining an atheist. A believer who goes through enough tribulation in life, like Job in the bible, will have a hard time keeping his faith in a loving God.

Since you don't use critical thinking, you're opinion of it is moot.

And of course, your claim to "religious experience" is specious at best. You have every opportunity to distinguish that experience from any other, but I trust you can't.

It would also appear "thinking" is not something you're aware.

I have seen too many times the claim, by atheists, that religion divides people, but if anything religion unites people. All members of a church are united in their beliefs and their rituals. What divides people is the notion that some people are better than others. That notion is as popular with believers and skeptics alike, but it's not an easy notion to get rid of.

Explain why there are thousands of sects of Christianity and explain how they are united? Explain how Christianity and Islam have united people?

 

[VitalOne]

Heaven as a place is not a misconception in Christianity, it's simply a concept that is consistent with the basis of the religion. The greatest difference between Christianity and Buddhism is that Christians believe the world is good so they want more of it, while Buddhists think the world is an illusion which should be renounced.

According Jesus the kingdom of God isn't a place:
"Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, 'The kingdom of God does not come with observation; 'nor will they say, '‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is 'within you." - Luke 17:20

Unfortunately Christianity today is not about following Jesus it is about following the Church, an institution. This is true for most other religions too.

 

[Little_Birdie]

Unfortunately Christianity today is not about following Jesus it is about following the Church, an institution. This is true for most other religions too.

no christains are not following christ because instruation has fallen apart so a misguided generation is misguiding the next further the church has the information handed down froom jesus to the apostles for anyone who wishes to seek it, but those indaviduals are few

 

[Medicine*Woman]

no christains are not following christ because instruation has fallen apart so a misguided generation is misguiding the next further the church has the information handed down froom jesus to the apostles for anyone who wishes to seek it, but those indaviduals are few

*************
M*W: Those "individuals" never existed, so stop with the bullshit.

 

[urielswing]

I think you a slightly confused. Agnostics are aloud to believe in spiritual and explainer beings of some kind. Atheists believe only in the power of man and science. Try a dictionary, a book on beliefs, or, dare I say it, a class on the subject.

 

[charles cure]

I think you a slightly confused. Agnostics are aloud to believe in spiritual and explainer beings of some kind. Atheists believe only in the power of man and science. Try a dictionary, a book on beliefs, or, dare I say it, a class on the subject.

as far as definitions go, what an atheist may believe is irrelevant.

the word atheist literally means "not a theist". an atheist could be pretty much anything other than someone that believes in a god, gods, or adheres to a religion. other than that, they could be spiritualists, believe in ghosts, aliens, natural philosophy, whatever.

i don't believe in god. i'm pretty sure that makes me an atheist, and as far as i know, its the only criteria that you need to fulfill. its not a club, just a label applied to non-belief.

so you're wrong, atheists don't necessarily believe in the power of man and science. although some may, whether they do or not doesn't effect their status as atheists.

 

[urielswing]

To be a “True Atheist” is to deny the existence of any explainer or spiritual beings, or another plain in general. Most “Proclaimed Atheists” are actually Agnostics, those that don’t conform to any organized religion. Now this is just the words of a religion major so I probably don’t know as much as you due but hay, you never know.