1st Degree- I don't believe it but I wish it were true,if I could get some supporting evidence I would follow it.
2nd Degree- I don't believe it and I also hope it is not true, but if I got some evidence that it is true, I would follow it.
3rd Degree - I don't believe it and I hope it is not true and even if it were proven to be true, I would not follow it because I could not worship a god such as this.
I am 3rd degree, started as 1st, but have progressed to 3rd based on a more complete study of the Christian god as described in the Bible. There's no way I could worship for eternity a god whose ethics are inferior to my own.
The only thing that's true is what you see before you, be good to mankind and to the earth, because that's what we're here to do, it's what's in front of us.
Everything else is superstition.
That's my worldview, it's what works for me. It's effortless, I don't have a choice in what I believe or disbelieve. For those with contrasting worldviews, that's ok, but I don't need to hear them, or read about them, anymore than I need to hear about someone's romantic fantasizes or read someone's dream journal. I don't disagree with someone's choice to have either, or believe they are true/will come true, but those things are best kept to oneself.
Well said, I bristle at the term "believe" but I'm at a loss to come up with a neutral term. Accept doesn't work in all situations, since the only thing I universally accept is someone's right to their own opinions/beliefs (so long as they are kept to themselves). The belief term is a stumper. So is "true" in the context of this post.
"Think" can connote an investigative process while "belief" can connote acceptance of an idea because someone said it's true, usually without evidence.
Those connotations don't apply to all situations, but I reject descriptions of atheism as a belief system.
Some people grow up in secular households, and because the are not indoctrinated in a religion, they might be atheists simply because their parents are. Similarly, some of us were X because our parents taught us to be X.
As people grow, hopefully they'll examine what they've been taught and accept or reject it based on their own thought processes.
I don't believe there is a God. If it were not for religion and believers that find so many ways to push god into my life, I would not give the idea of god or gods a second thought.
What I hope for is that one day the people that believe in invisible sky daddies with magical powers will realize that such a believe is not at all reasonable enough to think that such a belief gives them the right or even a reasonable justification to push their belief on anyone else.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/24/2011 08:13PM by MJ.
Christian religions? Definitely 3. There is nothing good that Christianity can offer.
God in general? Probably number 1.
Still, these degrees of Atheism aren't very accurate or useful. If there were evidence to believe in a god, Atheists would believe in god. Atheism isn't based on disliking the idea of god, Atheism is based on available evidence.
Be surprised all you want, the sentiment is irrelevant. By all means, let's have a discussion over it. I know you like to label me as anti-Christian, but I really am open to arguments contrary to my own. However, if you aren't will to say anything other than "wow, extreme, etc", your comment is useless.
Whether they are exclusive to Christianity is irrelevant.Very few things are exclusive to any one groupp. I still think they are good and so do most people. I have no problem with the Golden Rule. Sorry, but there is some good in everything. Like they say even Mussolini made the trains run on time. If you can't think of any good at all in Christianity then I would have to say that, yes, you are anti Christian. I have never said that before, BTW.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/24/2011 11:11PM by bona dea.
Yes you have. Someone was angry and started a thread about me and you said I was anti-Christian. I wouldn't accuse you of it if I didn't read it.
The Golden Rule doesn't work as anything more than a feel good aphorism for those who can't think for themselves. Even Christ in the New Testament only considered it as a stepping stone to his ultimate doctrine of love others as I love you. People who don't analyze the idea tend to love it.
"Sorry, but there is some good in everything."
I consider that another aphorism that is only believed when left unchallenged. My challenge of that is very far from being anti-Christian, and has nothing to do with those who are considered anti-Christian.
I couldn't disagree more.I guess you are saying I don't think or haven't analyzed the Golden Rule because my interpretation isn't the same as yours.Frannkly I find that a little insulting.I assure you that I do think and do so quite frequently.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/24/2011 11:35PM by bona dea.
There is no evidence that has been presented to peer review that establishes the Golden Rule is sound. Until then, it's just plain silly and ridiculous to follow such a rule.
I grew up going to a christian church. I guess I always thought Jesus' teachings were mostly a metaphor. I don't remember every believing he walked on water, rose from the dead, or claimed to be the (unique) son of god. I do remember thinking people were reading him much different than I did. In my opinion, many people who have a beef with Jesus are listening to the wrong people when deciding what Jesus was all about. For me, the golden rule is about the simplest summary of what he was about. But, if you want to set up a straw man and take a run at a windmill, he's a good place to start.
You assume that because this board is for ex-mormons, then it is exclusivley the dwelling place of atheists.. This is not the case, although certain board members may wish it was ..There are many who have a deep and abiding belief in God -yet certainly not the one of the Mormon variety or flavor.
I do not sustain the concepts of #1 or # 2 or even # 3.. Why don't we start an atheist board and let the professed atheists of this board (et.al.) "worship according to the dictates of their own conscience, let them worship who, what, and where they may"
Beth has an excellent point that in and of itself, like any religion, atheism has a set of beliefs that one must adhere to, to be classed as an atheist. Some of the people that are atheist, are just as radical and unyielding and intolerant as many of the TBM's we know..
Wait for the flaming or slamming by those who carry the atheist agenda ..
Atheists are sticklers for proof about god but willing to go on feeling when taking a position on why a person is gay. And many other positions they hold without demanding proof for their viewpoint. Which is okay. But just as silly and ridiculous.
It's all about facts, right. Prove it. Don't have an opinion without facts? Last I heard, there is no definitive scientific answer to the question. Of course, I never asked anyone for facts on that particular opinion because I never really cared. Who gives? Does it even matter? If it does, then quit with the face palms and f' offs and give facts (unless you're not one who ridicules others beliefs).
But I am making a point about those who demand facts and ridicule others when they are not presented with acceptable facts. It's the ridicule part that I find absurd.