I don't want to be an atheist

[Rhiannon]

Seriously these ludicrous beliefs leave me shaking my head, it looks like group madness to me, absolutely gar gar, funny farm fodder time?

ippy

And yet no doubt intelligent people believed them in the absence of scientific knowledge.

Christianity/Islam and other current beliefs will no doubt look just as daft in a couple of thousand years time.

No, you're right, clearly people like Jez, ht, Matt and myself are thick as shit. Keep going, maybe you'll get us to see your one true way.

I have heard can't remember where I read it but it seems that there are still a few followers of Zeus; I don't know and can't predict your impressions of believers/followers of Zeus, I'm sure there are some followers of this deity, would I be expected to take them seriously and be silent about how I feel about their belief, on a debating forum,    a yes or no will do?, but please feel free, either way I promise I wont let it upset me.

As for the true way; look for the evidence or the lack of.

ippy

'Followers of' the Greek pantheon most definitely do exist; that doesn't mean they 'believe in' them in the same way most monotheists 'believe in' God. Many pagans prefer to explore myths as Gonnagle describes elsewhere - for what they teach us about ourselves and our existence.

There is no reason to see a belief in Zeus or Thor as less sensible than a belief in the God of the Abrahamic faiths. But I get that you think all belief ridiculous.

[ippy]

You know Samuel's an atheist, Ippy?

Atheist or not I don't mind his approach, there's room for all.

ippy

[ippy]

Seriously these ludicrous beliefs leave me shaking my head, it looks like group madness to me, absolutely gar gar, funny farm fodder time?

ippy

And yet no doubt intelligent people believed them in the absence of scientific knowledge.

Christianity/Islam and other current beliefs will no doubt look just as daft in a couple of thousand years time.

No, you're right, clearly people like Jez, ht, Matt and myself are thick as shit. Keep going, maybe you'll get us to see your one true way.

I have heard can't remember where I read it but it seems that there are still a few followers of Zeus; I don't know and can't predict your impressions of believers/followers of Zeus, I'm sure there are some followers of this deity, would I be expected to take them seriously and be silent about how I feel about their belief, on a debating forum,    a yes or no will do?, but please feel free, either way I promise I wont let it upset me.

As for the true way; look for the evidence or the lack of.

ippy

'Followers of' the Greek pantheon most definitely do exist; that doesn't mean they 'believe in' them in the same way most monotheists 'believe in' God. Many pagans prefer to explore myths as Gonnagle describes elsewhere - for what they teach us about ourselves and our existence.

There is no reason to see a belief in Zeus or Thor as less sensible than a belief in the God of the Abrahamic faiths. But I get that you think all belief ridiculous.

Followers, believers, take your pick, all the same to me and as I said follow the evidence, and no I wouldn't see belief in Zeus or Thor as less sensible than a belief in the god of the Abrhamic faiths.

I would be lieing if I said that I thought all belief in the mythical, supernatural and magical elements of any of those beliefs made sense to me.

ippy

[Rhiannon]

There's no reason why they should, Ippy. But there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers in'.

[ippy]

There's no reason why they should, Ippy. But there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers in'.

 "there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers", yes and I've often noticed that on this forum usually where someone is on a looser and the only way out, as they try, is to try splitting hairs on the semantics, now where have I seen that most recently? 

ippy

[Rhiannon]

I agree with Maeght, I don't think there's much choice in it. That said, I find atheists more tolerant than Christians, at least on the net.

I don't like it when atheists want me to 'see sense ' or 'come round'; very occasionally I've been offered atheist book lists. It's still less offensive than being told I'm led astray by Satan though.

I get Jeremy - I found no longer being a Christian both liberating and less stressful.

Well I don't think you are led astray by Satan.

I think you are a bit overly sensitive sometimes and have a bad habit of taking things personally.

Sweetpea I think was talking generally, not personally.

Everyone has been led astray by Satan, according to someone somewhere, look at how Catholics and the Pope are regarded by some other areas of Christianity.

The Jews have had even more problems with Christians in the past, probably at least as much as Pagans.

There are so many groups who's beliefs in religion has a negative view of those outside it, that it doesn't pay to take it all personally and get upset.

Life is too short.

Thank you, Rose.... you're absolutely right.

Anyway, I'm done with this place.

That's a shame, SweetPea. But...it isn't that I've taken what you said personally I haven't - but that the beliefs that link New Age to 'being led astray by lucifer' aren't just intolerant and inaccurate, they are dangerous. That you tried a path and found it wrong for you is completely understandable but that doesn't make it evil. The persecutions that happen to pagans and followers of other alternative spiritualities aren't made up; they affect lives, including families. Matt nearly lost both his kids and his liberty because of them. I know you didn't mean a direct comparison of your path to mine - although they were not dissimilar until recently - but giving credence to the idea that leaving conventional Christianity is in any way satanic or satan-led leaves pagans and others unsafe and open to persecution.

[Rhiannon]

There's no reason why they should, Ippy. But there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers in'.

 "there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers", yes and I've often noticed that on this forum usually where someone is on a looser and the only way out, as they try, is to try splitting hairs on the semantics, now where have I seen that most recently? 

ippy

Actually to be entirely accurate most pagans who work with a particular pantheon use exactly that term - 'work with'.

The difference is possibly best understood if you compare 'working with' with wood or clay, to 'believing in' wood or clay.

[Rhiannon]

Have you made up your mind that you don't believe in Thor ?

Exactly!

I suspect Rose is open- minded about Heathenry.

Yes I am, and I think the one I have encountered is very interesting, pity she left here.
I'm all for learning about a variety of viewpoints 😀

Agree totally.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Rose,

"Small amounts of philosophy leads to atheism, large amounts leads us to God".

No not Gonnagle,


Sir Francis Bacon.

[ippy]

Dear Rose,

"Small amounts of philosophy leads to atheism, large amounts leads us to God".

No not Gonnagle,


Sir Francis Bacon.

If you were to consider just a couple of words out of place could have you burnt at the stake even if you were
the equivalent of an atheist in those times, he or anyone else would be more inclined to say things like that, so would I, had I been around in those times.

Sorry Gonners that doesn't carry much weight, better to try something else.

ippy

[jeremyp]

I like being able to explore a wide range of topics, and find my own answers from Sikhism to UFOs.

Wouldn't you rather have the right answers?

[ippy]

There's no reason why they should, Ippy. But there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers in'.

 "there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers", yes and I've often noticed that on this forum usually where someone is on a looser and the only way out, as they try, is to try splitting hairs on the semantics, now where have I seen that most recently? 

ippy

Actually to be entirely accurate most pagans who work with a particular pantheon use exactly that term - 'work with'.

The difference is possibly best understood if you compare 'working with' with wood or clay, to 'believing in' wood or clay.

And the meaning of followers and believers often convey completely different meanings depending on the context, just as I said, then in comes the semantic pickers:

Following in Wotan's footsteps or believing in Wotan, split the difference there, oh and do it without appearing to be a hair splitter too.

ippy 

[Rhiannon]

I like being able to explore a wide range of topics, and find my own answers from Sikhism to UFOs.

Wouldn't you rather have the right answers?

Bloody hell, Jeremy. 

[jeremyp]

I like being able to explore a wide range of topics, and find my own answers from Sikhism to UFOs.

Wouldn't you rather have the right answers?

Seems to me the right answers are a bit subjective,

You mean UFO's (by which I assume you mean alien spacecraft) are true for some people and not others?

[Gonnagle]

Dear Rose,

But once you jettison all your personal beliefs, when you resign all that makes up Rose to the waste bin, when you can look at the garden and not wonder about the gardener, when you can stop and think, hell we are just an accident of nature, when you can cease to be amazed at humanity and all that it can achieve just by this thing we call imagination ( good and bad ).

Lastly and most importantly, when you can look at religion and think, what a load of rubbish, nothing to be learned here, science is my new religion, then and only then will you be an atheist my child and the universe and all that encompasses will seem to be................ see them tumbling down, blowing along with the tumbling tumbling tumble weed.

Gonnagle.

[Aruntraveller]

Dear Rose,

But once you jettison all your personal beliefs, when you resign all that makes up Rose to the waste bin, when you can look at the garden and not wonder about the gardener, when you can stop and think, hell we are just an accident of nature, when you can cease to be amazed at humanity and all that it can achieve just by this thing we call imagination ( good and bad ).

Lastly and most importantly, when you can look at religion and think, what a load of rubbish, nothing to be learned here, science is my new religion, then and only then will you be an atheist my child and the universe and all that encompasses will seem to be................ see them tumbling down, blowing along with the tumbling tumbling tumble weed.

Gonnagle.

Why would not believing in a deity aka "the Gardener" mean that I am not amazed at what humanity is capable of?

I'm sorry Gonners this from you on this occasion is unutterable and faintly insulting nonsense.

[Maeght]

Dear Rose,

But once you jettison all your personal beliefs, when you resign all that makes up Rose to the waste bin, when you can look at the garden and not wonder about the gardener, when you can stop and think, hell we are just an accident of nature, when you can cease to be amazed at humanity and all that it can achieve just by this thing we call imagination ( good and bad ).

Lastly and most importantly, when you can look at religion and think, what a load of rubbish, nothing to be learned here, science is my new religion, then and only then will you be an atheist my child and the universe and all that encompasses will seem to be................ see them tumbling down, blowing along with the tumbling tumbling tumble weed.

Gonnagle.

There is much to be amazed and to wonder about in the natural world Gonnagle without the need to believe in God.

Science isn't a religion but it is a tool which lets us discover some amazing things.

The view of an atheist presented in this post isn't a very accurate one I'm afraid Gonnagle - but I can understand why this impression is gioven by the posts of some on here.

[Outrider]

There's no reason why they should, Ippy. But there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers in'.

 "there is a world of difference between 'followers of' and 'believers", yes and I've often noticed that on this forum usually where someone is on a looser and the only way out, as they try, is to try splitting hairs on the semantics, now where have I seen that most recently? 

ippy

It's a huge difference: followers of Christian ethics don't necessarily believe that Jesus walked on water or that God is real, but they do (probably) believe that you should 'love thy neighbour'.

That's a massive difference.

O.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Trent,

Just faintly, well let me insult you a little more, do you not think that the person who calls himself Trentvoyager is unique, I do, as I find all Posters on here unique, tell me, why is this, why in all this world could I search and never find another Trentvoyager, oh! I could find someone who has the same tastes, likes the same music, even if you had a twin he would still not be Trentvoyager, why!! is that not a terrible insult you lovely man.

Atheism, I just don't get it.

Gonnagle.

[BeRational]

Dear Trent,

Just faintly, well let me insult you a little more, do you not think that the person who calls himself Trentvoyager is unique, I do, as I find all Posters on here unique, tell me, why is this, why in all this world could I search and never find another Trentvoyager, oh! I could find someone who has the same tastes, likes the same music, even if you had a twin he would still not be Trentvoyager, why!! is that not a terrible insult you lovely man.

Atheism, I just don't get it.

Gonnagle.

So, because there are unique things you think there is a god.

Is god unique? Must there be a god that created him too?

Also, if the universe is infinite, it could be that there are exact copies of all of us somewhere, so we would not be unique at all.

Does this remove the need for a god?

[Gonnagle]

Dear Berational,

IF!! big ifs, if the universe is infinite, if there is a exact copy of me out there somewhere.

So, because there are unique things you think there is a god.

One of the infinite reason why I think there is a God, but I suppose the important word is "why".

Another reason why I don't get atheism, just is, is not a answer I am happy with.

Gonnagle.

[Rhiannon]

Dear Rose,

But once you jettison all your personal beliefs, when you resign all that makes up Rose to the waste bin, when you can look at the garden and not wonder about the gardener, when you can stop and think, hell we are just an accident of nature, when you can cease to be amazed at humanity and all that it can achieve just by this thing we call imagination ( good and bad ).

Lastly and most importantly, when you can look at religion and think, what a load of rubbish, nothing to be learned here, science is my new religion, then and only then will you be an atheist my child and the universe and all that encompasses will seem to be................ see them tumbling down, blowing along with the tumbling tumbling tumble weed.

Gonnagle.

Why a garden, Gonners? Why not the wilderness, the mountains, the oceans, the thicket and the desert? No gardener necessary, just nature shifting, creating and recreating itself.

[jakswan]

Another reason why I don't get atheism, just is, is not a answer I am happy with.

Its good that you concede to wishful thinking.

[Andy]

One of the infinite reason why I think there is a God, but I suppose the important word is "why".

At what point can you stop asking "why"?

[Outrider]

But once you jettison all your personal beliefs, when you resign all that makes up Rose to the waste bin, when you can look at the garden and not wonder about the gardener, when you can stop and think, hell we are just an accident of nature, when you can cease to be amazed at humanity and all that it can achieve just by this thing we call imagination ( good and bad ).

Why do I need a deity to be amazed by reality, including our own part in that?

Lastly and most importantly, when you can look at religion and think, what a load of rubbish, nothing to be learned here, science is my new religion, then and only then will you be an atheist my child and the universe and all that encompasses will seem to be................ see them tumbling down, blowing along with the tumbling tumbling tumble weed.

That's not tumble-weed, that's the remains of your straw-man There is a danger of throwing out the baby with the bath-water in the dismissal of religion, there are things to be learnt. That's why people are adopting the model of churches and congregations to try to build communities in atheist and secular circles, for instance.

There is also what appears to be errant nonsense, from the instutionalised homophobia, misogyny, racism, caste discrimination, climate-change denial and evolution denial, and the abhorrence (not unique to religious organisations, by any means) of putting the reputation of the organisation above the wefare of its constituents.

As always, there is never a simple, pithy phrase that encompasses it all. As one of my personal heroes would have it:

"I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that." Dr Ben Goldacre.

O.

Gonnagle.
[/quote]