My views on religion

Post Reply New Topic

me, anti-christian?
i am anti-religion!
i need proof of gods!

books don't work for me...
anyone can make up god...
try reality

amazing stories
amazing evidence
one needs the other

Yet in the shape of your dialectic I hear familiar rhythms, forgotten hands still weaving a tapestry of belief.

The religious spirit and the atheist are mutually unintelligible; even the atheist religious spirit would feel as though they were speaking entirely different languages, seeing entirely different colors.

Reality my friend - now that is unattainable. Take care how much of Ymir's body you yet still stand upon.

Glad to hear that, cause I'm a Liberal Christian.

The Christian faith is not predicated on homophobia or closemindedness, despite what you may think. The Bible is a very confusing and self-contradicting document. IMO the passages in Isaiah and Levitcus do not give one the right to hate & persecute others. Scripture can be manipulated to support almost any position one might choose to take, Christlike or not.

The New Testament supercedes any nasty thing the Old Testament might have said, anway. The OT is the Jewish Bible. Since we Christians are not Jews, we are not compelled by the their laws. Do you support freedom to pursue religion or despise it? Please clarify. And simply because a Christian may disagree with you on an issue does not mean he is ignorant of it.

Atheists don't have "religious spirits." By your own admittance, that is a baldfaced contradiction. And who is Ymir? Is Ymir somehoew the living god of atheists?

Atheists and theists are indeed mutually unintelligible. I agree with you there.

Atheists don't have religious spirits - but religious spirits can be atheists.

And Ymir is not the living God of atheists; he is the dead God.

Bah! If atheists have a dead god instead of a living one ... this speech is bulls**t.

If religious spirits can be atheists ... is this not utter twaddle?

Why do atheists believe in a god, living or dead? Isn't that oxymoron and contradiction wrapped up in more bulls**t?

he's referencing a norse god. atheists don't worship any god. i think if anything, he's being more metaphorical with the image of atheists killing god the same way the sons of borr killed ymir.

except something has to exist first before it's destroyed.

Sons of Borr... these Norse mythical figures are no more substantial as flesh & bone than our Holy Spirit, which atheists scoff at because the Holy Spirit cannot be dissected on a table and catalogued for science. Giving credence to Norse mythology seems pretty off-message for a hardline atheist. You can't state a position and then go back on it very slowly, hoping no one will notice. Because eventually someone will.

God, gods, giants, titans, any and all mythological creatures would be laughed at and scorned by an atheist, yes or no?

^i said that in reference to ymir being "killed".


greek mythology is more entertaining than christian mythology but that doesn't mean i think it's any more real.

You just said that Ymir is the dead god of atheists.

I find it interesting that someone here who is raised secular could become religious. Why?

i didn't say that, mr poetry did.

I like dragons and unicorns!

Give me a break, I was in a weird mood last night.

Actually, the source analogy was "The Death of God", fyi, which I then adapted the Ymir legend to in reference to the Pious Atheist. I rather like the analogy personally, and I think I may develop it further sometime.

I tend to think there is a remarkable amount of residual philosophical baggage which modern atheists present as evident which have as its origin unconscious assumptions which ultimately sprang from the belief in God/"Platonism for the People". However "I don't believe in God" people are, they still very much lack a truly post-Christianity world view IMO. While this was well elocuted on the subject of morality by Nietzsche, I tend to wonder whether or not our ontology also bears strains of former idealogies; not necessarily that we ought to go beyond these so much as recognize how very much subject we are lurking philosophies. Strong Rhetoric is to my mind at least 50% of the time symptomatic of a true belief bordering on faith and devotion; our epistemologies are very much constructs which one is almost naive not to have a little bit of a light heart with. The very substrate of our consciousness makes assumptions we do not deserve.

And yes, I would say that there is a difference between being religious and having a religious spirit. Religious spirit is more characteristic of the way in which information is processed, beliefs are formed, etc. It is a property of the mind which is not necessarily selfsame with belief in God. My spirit is naturally religious and the dialectic of atheism is hardly my cup of tea - yet do I believe in God?

I consider myself an atheist but from a philosophical perspective your reasoning is just as narrow minded as the reasoning of a fundamentalist. Not every truth can be based purely on empirical proofs and/or logic. I’ll give an example.

It’s impossible for me to empirically prove that you would feel pain if I smacked you in the face. Yet it’s in my human nature to assume that you will feel pain. Based on this belief that other people experience pain as I do I am able to refrain from treating people like objects to be clobbered if I get frustrated. I don’t worry about a rock feeling pain if I kick it even though from an empirical perspective humans and rocks are made out of the same material. We all consist of the same subatomic particles. This shows that there are important moral ideas that can’t really be proved.