Can Atheists and Theists ever acknowledge each other.

[Willamena]

Thanks. Exactly my point.

Then why are you arguing with Quint?

 

[Quintessence]

Then why are you arguing with Quint?

Yeah, I don't understand it either. I don't think we're communicating. Not as if it's the first time.

 

[psychoslice]

Atheists and Theists don't need to acknowledge each other, we are all titled to our own beliefs, its only when we try to shove that belief down someone's throat, that any problem arises, be that atheist or religion.

 

[Bunyip]

Then why are you arguing with Quint?

Because I do not see how atheist religiousness can not be a contradiction in terms. That was the bone of contention I was trying to explore.

How can you be a passionate not-a-starwars-fan?How can one be religi8us about one's status as not-being-a-starwars-fan?

 

[Bunyip]

Yeah, I don't understand it either. I don't think we're communicating. Not as if it's the first time.

Sorry if I did not make myself clear. What I can not see is how atheism could possibly be religious.

 

[Willamena]

Because I do not see how atheist religiousness can not be a contradiction in terms. That was the bone of contention I was trying to explore.

How can you be a passionate not-a-starwars-fan?How can one be religi8us about one's status as not-being-a-starwars-fan?

One can be extremely passionate about no Star Wars.

Especially if one shows up at conventions dressed in pointed ears.

 

[Bunyip]

One can be extremely passionate about no Star Wars.

If you say so.

My understanding is that this thread is about acknowledg7ng each others positions. I am not trying to misrepresent atheism - I honestly do not see how it can qualify as religious.

 

[Bunyip]

Yeah, I don't understand it either. I don't think we're communicating. Not as if it's the first time.

I apologise if I have offended you. My contention here seems to be cohesive with that of several if not most of the other atheists here. I can be passionate about many things, but it does not make sense to me to be passionate about atheism, or religious about it.

 

[icehorse]

Sonofason- I don't mind research, but don't expect me to pay for it.
=== We all have to pay for some stuff we don't agree with. I think churches ought to pay taxes like everyone else.

soas - I don't care what you do with your criminals. Some people deserve to die. But if you want to show compassion on such persons, I can only commend you for it.
== no no, not capital punishment - corporal punishment. Beating kids with sticks.

soas - It is a disgrace to murder innocent unborn human children. It's on your head, not mine. Do whatever you think is right. I'll let God be your judge.
== I know this is a delicate subject...

soas - stop blaspheming our God, and we wont need blasphemy laws. If you will not respect our beliefs, we will do what we can to force you to respect our beliefs. Like it or not. I don't really care.
== Any just god will care more for freedom of expression than he will care what some mortals say about him. Your ideas about blasphemy are to protect your own sensibilities, god can manage for himself.

soas - There are so many apostates, I wouldn't know where to start. Is this really an issue. It certainly has nothing to do with me.
== it is a huge issue in some religions.

soas - If you commit a crime, you lose my respect. If your race is more inclined to commit more crime, that race has lost my respect. If a particular race or culture is seemingly more inclined to cut off people's heads, then that race has lost my respect. I will discriminate against whom I choose to discriminate against. The ball is in their court. But now the respect must be earned. And there are people of all races who have individually earned my respect.
== But do you prejudge?

soas - Why would someone blackmail a person in need of help?
== Why indeed would the RC church do that? To protect some outdated ideas about contraception, that's why.

soas - I will teach children what I choose to teach children. It's not up to you or anyone else. I don't care what you call it. That is what societies do. They indoctrinate children. And that is what I will continue to do.
== That's what old societies do, the world must move past indoctrination.

soas - Sorry, you don't get everything you want, nor should you. My needs are not your needs. Please don't assume as much.
== I don't expect to win all the battles, but it's high time that religious practices that are counter to common sense morality get some push back.

 

[Bunyip]

Atheists and Theists don't need to acknowledge each other, we are all titled to our own beliefs, its only when we try to shove that belief down someone's throat, that any problem arises, be that atheist or religion.

Absolutely. Shoving your belief down somebodies throat is not cool. But forums like this where people come to discuss them is an appropriate forum to question, challenge and examine our beliefs.

 

[psychoslice]

Absolutely. Shoving your belief down somebodies throat is not cool. But forums like this where people come to discuss them is an appropriate forum to question, challenge and examine our beliefs.

Yes that's true, if you come to these places such as forums, then its on for all lol.

 

[dgirl1986]

There will always be conflict when you talk about different opinions on anything be it religion, politics, child rearing, environmental issues etc.

 

[Draka]

I sort of disagree. You see the Old Testament is describing a people who lived under a Covenant that God had made with them. They agreed to it.
If you wanted to be a part of that culture, you had to live in it. That Covenant was God showing man what Man must do to find grace in God, and Mercy from God. The way one found Grace was by obeying God's Law. Those who didn't were required to pay the penalty for breaking that Law.

Today we live under a New Covenant. It is a Covenant that must remind us of the Old, for it to be of any value. A person who commits adultery, or a person who murders another person deserves to die. That is the law. That is the punishment required of those sins. It is the punishment required for all sins against God. That is why Jesus had said that not one jot nor tittle would be removed from the law until all was fulfilled.

But we live under a New Covenant. Jesus has shown us, and taught us that we no longer must give people what they deserve. We can love them, and we can show mercy and compassion towards them. We can forgive them.

The penalty of death is still in effect. However that price was paid for all of us when Christ suffered and died on the Cross. He died to pay the penalty that we all deserve to pay ourselves.

This is what I was talking about when I was speaking of taking the mythology literally instead of figuratively. See, I don't have issue with the Bible when taken as the myth that it is and used as a guide for basing a belief structure to guide one's life upon certain principles and values. That is what what religion is. The only time issues arise is when people get it in their heads that myth is meant to be taken literally and then all kinds of things and "justifications" for behaviors arise from that. The interpretations and "because scripture says so" never ceases and it can become a dangerous thing in so many ways.

 

[Sonofason]

This is what I was talking about when I was speaking of taking the mythology literally instead of figuratively. See, I don't have issue with the Bible when taken as the myth that it is and used as a guide for basing a belief structure to guide one's life upon certain principles and values. That is what what religion is. The only time issues arise is when people get it in their heads that myth is meant to be taken literally and then all kinds of things and "justifications" for behaviors arise from that. The interpretations and "because scripture says so" never ceases and it can become a dangerous thing in so many ways.

Okay, this statement of yours is pretty vague. Please explain which part of my comment that you find to be dangerous. Is it that you don't like the idea that I believe that people commit sins for which they "deserve" to die? Is it that you don't like the idea that through Christ I am justified in forgiving a persons sins, even though they deserve to die, according to the Law of Moses? Or are you suggesting that it is dangerous for me to believe that Jesus died for my sins. Is it dangerous that He died for all sins? What exactly about what I've said in post 154 is dangerous?

 

[Simplelogic]

I grew up believing that a person had to have a certain "belief" to be considered righteous. (I realize righteous is a religious term but bear with me) Because of this premise I dismissed many good people I came across because they didn't have "belief" or the "right belief". All I can say is that I have respect for all people who are sincere and honest in life. I also believe that they will be rewarded in the life to come.

I have met Atheist, Agnostics, Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhist and Hindus who live honest and sincere lives. I personally believe in God and I also believe God accepts all those who live good lives, regardless of "personal belief". God has always been after a circumcised "heart", not a circumcised "head".

I don't mean to assume that Atheist or any other group needs my approval anyways. Just sharing some personal thoughts on the matter. I hope to have many more challenging conversations with religious and non religious!

Check out these Atheist, they seemed to have bridge the gap a little bit:

Atheists for Jesus

 

[Renji]

Having arguments or difference of beliefs or lack of it, doesn't mean both parties cannot be acquainted with each other. Neither does it mean 'disrespect'. I just don't know the case with the republicans and democrats.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Can Muslims and Christians acknowledge each other? Whatever your answer to that we can apply that directly to the question in the OP.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sorry if I did not make myself clear. What I can not see is how atheism could possibly be religious.

It rests upon a definition of "religious" which means (more or less) "enthusiastic about something/anything, be it spiritual, supernatural or mundane.
Example:
I'm not a religious atheist. Tis cuz I don't go to atheist gatherings or trumpet its virtues.
But I am a religious gear head. Cuz I do go to machinery gatherings, & revel in crankshafts, frames, governors, cylinders, pistons, platens, cast iron, etc, etc.

This use of "religous" seems more confusing than useful.

 

[Bunyip]

It rests upon a definition of "religious" which means (more or less) "enthusiastic about something/anything, be it spiritual, supernatural or mundane.
Example:
I'm not a religious atheist. Tis cuz I don't go to atheist gatherings or trumpet its virtues.
But I am a religious gear head. Cuz I do go to machinery gatherings, & revel in crankshafts, frames, governors, cylinders, pistons, platens, cast iron, etc, etc.

This use of "religous" seems more confusing than useful.

Yes I agree. Defining 'religious' as 'enthusiastic about' strikes me as just silly.

 

[Draka]

Okay, this statement of yours is pretty vague. Please explain which part of my comment that you find to be dangerous. Is it that you don't like the idea that I believe that people commit sins for which they "deserve" to die? Is it that you don't like the idea that through Christ I am justified in forgiving a persons sins, even though they deserve to die, according to the Law of Moses? Or are you suggesting that it is dangerous for me to believe that Jesus died for my sins. Is it dangerous that He died for all sins? What exactly about what I've said in post 154 is dangerous?

I was speaking in general. Though the idea that some "sins" like adultery are found to be deserving of death is more than a little disturbing. However, it does make for a good point to start out with. Taking the mythology literally, believing these things to be factual "laws" and the like lead people down a dangerous road. A road of judgement of others, discrimination, and even hate can blossom. The judgement poured forth from believing in literal interpretations of myth can bring about damage. Just look at how homosexuals are viewed and their fight for equal rights with marriage all because of people's clinging a bible held belief. A specifically chosen one at that as the bible actually defines marriage in many different ways, but as has been seen, people will use it, and the select interpretations from it and chosen passages from it, to justify their needs, wants, and desires, especially when it comes to the judgement and restrictions of others. This is where the "dangerous" comes it quite a bit. Of course, there is always the absurd in it, such as the whale and Jonah, the literal account of Creation and so on that simply are not possible, yet there are those who hold that they are and push that idea that the bible, is again, literal fact. This messes with a child's ability to learn reality from myth, legend from fact, allegory from science. This is an impairment of our children's education and basic learning capabilities.

So, there's just a couple basic ways that taking myth literally is dangerous. Dangerous to people due to discrimination and underlying hatred, and dangerous due to educational impairment.