Log in

View Full Version : My view on Religion. It's not simple Atheism, as a lot of you thought.


riddla on the roof
2006-06-03, 16:54
Yes, I'll admit to being an Atheist. To the extent of belief. So, I guess if you wanted to be really technical about it, I am .....Agnostic, Deist, and Atheist

What you may ask is?

Yes, I am. But only in practice, not in belief. Read on, Disciples.

Agnostic:

An agnostic is one that believes that the existance of a god can not be proven, nor disproven. This is actually very true, as it is generally accepted, even among the Atheist populous, that the existance of a god would not be proven, as in all of the holy writings, to look upon a god would cause...Death. It is, therefore, only logical, even considering the options, that a person should be of definite Atheist faith, or even of Theist faith. It defies logic, it burdens the mind to blindness. I am an agnostic because I believe that the existence of a "God" in the sense of the Great One cannot be defined. How would you know? You can't.



Deist:

A Deist is one that believes in a God, but does not know "which one", or does not conform to the standards of organized religion for the "staining" of such. This is almost contradictory, some would think, to me claiming to be an Atheist, but that i'll explain later. I am a Deist because of the reason that, well, we could not have jsut appeared alone. The Big Bang, if we are to believe a creationist-evolutionary role of humanity, had to have been triggered by something. If the definition of space-time was not created, or even existed, before the BB, then what triggered the BB? Simple, A heirarchous being. One of "higher" authority, or of higher intellect, or even of human intellect. Something created an imbalance in the environment that would have set off the oncoming explostion-- This is where my Deism comes in hand. I know that something did this, but I dont know who. I believe in a higher being, and perhaps in the Afterlife. As St. Thomas Aquinas said:

"Humans are born with two incurable diseases: One, Death, from which there no escape, and the other, hope, which says that maybe death isn't the end."

I dont know what the future after death holds, but the only thing, and mind the cliche of it all, that is certain about it is this: I dont know. That said, I am also a Deist. I am an Agnostic, and I do not believe that my thoughts could be dispriven, nor proven. I do, however, believe that humans hold this innate ability which sets us apart from other animals: Potential. We have superceded all of the obstacles placed upon us, from the burden of the Inqusition, to the hurdle of the Space Race, to the impossiblity of a piece of metal being able to kill millions. This was all made possible by a higher being, one that allowed free will, but did not ordain. I believe that logically, there had to have been a higher being (or force). It is for that reason that I am the way I am. I believe in humanity's ability to advance and become independent of any obstacle.

Atheist:

How then, am I an Atheist? I am an Atheist in practice and in action. I hold the theories of Deism to be true, however, I have to play Pascal's Wager on this one. Which is:

God is, or He is not. But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up...Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose. This is one point settled. But your happiness? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is.



What this says is this: Believe in God, and you get "rewarded", but only if he exists.

Believe in God, and if for some reason he doesn't exist, then you left behind a good legacy. Dont believe in God, and if he does exist, then you will get sent to Hell or Seoul or what-have-you. Dont believe in him, and if he doesn't exist, then your life would have been a complete waste.

In this case, I will point out the Atheist's Wager, which is this:

It is better to live your life as if there are no gods, and try to make the world a better place for your being in it. If there is no god, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent god, he will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in him.

And why not?



In a sense, I am an Agnostic-Deist-Atheist because for a few logical steps.

I am an Agnostic because The Great Watchmaker's Existance can neither be proven, nor disproven.

I am a Deist because I belive that The Great Watchmaker is very real, and more than likely does not intervene in human affairs, thus, takes me to the Humanist relation of this. Which, brings me to my communist and Socialist beliefs.

I am an Atheist for the reason that I will not believe in ANY god, because of the Human Factor that it will play. I will, in this case, choose to play the Atheist's Wager. I live my life to promote independence of the human, and not of the Religion. I do not seek to impose morality beliefs on the person, and I do not seek to bow down to one knee to Yahweh in a search for everlasting life. No, that is not nearly enough. I do not seek that. However, I will not lie: I fear an empty death. I know that my endeavors in this life will NEVER rival those of Mohanndas Ghandi, or even those of such Civil Rights' Leaders such as Malcolm X. No, I will never achieve those prodigies. I can only hope to acheive peace of mind by, in the words of Ghandi, to "be the change I want to see in the world".

Now.....Who read this? Any questions? No? Screw you.

mr. benfield
2006-06-03, 17:15
i am also a deist. i belive in a god, i belive he created the universe, and life, but i have no idea which religion to follow. i have atcually made up my own religion based on my own beliefs and experiences, but i dont take it very seriosuly. i have been raised as a christian my whole life, so i cant help but lean towards chiristianity. i dont know. thats what sucks about religion. nobody knows.

kenwih
2006-06-03, 17:42
no. you can only be one. google irreducible complexity and learn why the it is pseudoscience and why the watchmaker analogy is flawed.

Real.PUA
2006-06-03, 19:33
Richard Dawkins wrote an entire book on it: The Blind Watchmaker.

OP: Why do you believe in a "watchmaker" ... what has convinced you that one exists?

AngryFemme
2006-06-03, 21:34
If you read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Dawkins, you'd be missing out on ALOT if you didn't follow-up with Dan Dennett's "Religion as a Natural Phenomena".

Hand-in-Hand, those two books go together like ... (loss of a simile) - they just fit together nicely.

Abrahim
2006-06-03, 22:15
quote:Originally posted by mr. benfield:

i am also a deist. i belive in a god, i belive he created the universe, and life, but i have no idea which religion to follow. i have atcually made up my own religion based on my own beliefs and experiences, but i dont take it very seriosuly. i have been raised as a christian my whole life, so i cant help but lean towards chiristianity. i dont know. thats what sucks about religion. nobody knows.

Wazat? Wanna talk to me on MSN, AIM, Yahoo? I'm a religion peddler!

glutamate antagonist
2006-06-03, 23:36
Atheism is obviously the logical option. No evidence for a god :. no god exists.

Any omniscient god would be able to see your reasoning behind disbelieving through such logic and wouldn't punish you for it, should he be benevolent.

As far as I care, I'm dead = I'm dead, no sentient brain function, no afterlife.

Abrahim
2006-06-04, 00:25
quote:Originally posted by glutamate antagonist:

Atheism is obviously the logical option. No evidence for a god :. no god exists.

Any omniscient god would be able to see your reasoning behind disbelieving through such logic and wouldn't punish you for it, should he be benevolent.

As far as I care, I'm dead = I'm dead, no sentient brain function, no afterlife.

Would suck if you wake up.

AngryFemme
2006-06-04, 01:41
Why would it suck?

Unless you happened to retain the memories it would take to be able to identify with the error in your belief system from the previous life, how would it seem like anything at all different than what our present reality does now?

Supposing the consciousness from your previous life were somehow *suspended* until you were resurrected again (and that is a FAR stretch of the imagination) ... what would suck about it, other than the initial suprise (and one would think, glee!) at realizing you are alive yet again?

Let me guess: This is where The Judgement begins, and where we get what's been coming to us.

I know everyone is sick of hearing about it, but I'd really like to know how Abrahim's Reality God is not only inclined to, but capable of passing judgement and doling out rewards/punishment to the very thing he claims it is essentially a PART of?!

Wouldn't it just be scolding itself?

Real.PUA
2006-06-04, 05:11
Abrahim is basically a normal theist and believes in the judeo-christian god, he only started with this reality crap as a way to avoid the hard debate. He is able to circumvent the evidence against god by saying god is reality, but he still believes in the living judeo-christian god (but doesnt make this belief obvious). This is where the apparent inconsistency of his philosophy lies.