TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Roll Call: TOTA Atheist Thread
Pages (12): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 »

quote:

Originally posted by Espresso another general statment with no proof! please provide historical facts and evidence!

bah, is pretty hard but a google gave me this one:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/curr_war.htm

to clarify my problem with athiesism:
i was an athiest till 8 yrs ago and a firm one, but then i noticed that thers's an inherent problem:
Athiests criticize and doubt god's exsistence but don't question their own belief (i.e god does not exist) even though that is a dogma which they pursuit and act upon. neither they provide a way to life as religion -being the path from human beings to god- does, so you're just basically left in the air without any conclusion. they can't answer very simple questions about reason of existence, universe and life.
it's easy to criticize/doubt but it's hard to proove/provide facts about the rules that govern life and whole existence.
if you're Athiest at least be a good one and provide answers

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew bah, is pretty hard but a google gave me this one: http://www.religioustolerance.org/curr_war.htm

see that's what i'm saying, you just quote what you've heard without doing a reseach about it and coming up with it yourself. you can't even give one example off the top of your head and not "google" it? what do "you" have to say about it yourself?
i'll check out the link though

quote:

Originally posted by Espresso to clarify my problem with athiesism: i was an athiest till 8 yrs ago and a firm one, but then i noticed that thers's an inherent problem: Athiests criticize and doubt god's exsistence but don't question their own belief (i.e god does not exist) even though that is a dogma which they pursuit and act upon. neither they provide a way to life as religion -being the path from human beings to god- does, so you're just basically left in the air without any conclusion. they can't answer very simple questions about reason of existence, universe and life. it's easy to criticize/doubt but it's hard to proove/provide facts about the rules that govern life and whole existence. if you're Athiest at least be a good one and provide answers

andi....u amaze me at times...

quote:

Originally posted by Espresso see that's what i'm saying, you just quote what you've heard without doing a reseach about it and coming up with it yourself. you can't even give one example off the top of your head and not "google" it? what do "you" have to say about it yourself? i'll check out the link though

haha, well i could come up with at least 10 examples easily on the top of my head! but i thought i should find some nice percentage as to more prove my point but that site at least showed that very many of our conflicts has a religious background! i have no idea if the site is biased or not, but till you have showed a lot of violent conflicts that has nothing to do with religion i will stand by my argument

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew haha, well i could come up with at least 10 examples easily on the top of my head! but i thought i should find some nice percentage as to more prove my point but that site at least showed that very many of our conflicts has a religious background! i have no idea if the site is biased or not, but till you have showed a lot of violent conflicts that has nothing to do with religion i will stand by my argument

www.religioustolerance.org i find to be an excellent site .. i've been checking it out for some time and hav always found some useful..

it's very unbiased btw. juss to let ya know since u were wondering ..

quote:

Originally posted by Espresso ok, wait a sec here, beh! it seems there are 2 things here being mixed up. first you can choose your religion after all the tought you want to give it and if there are hypocrites out there that do whatever does that mean that you have to reject religion? or is it them who you should reject? and moreover i don't see the connection bettween this and following and subcribing to only 1 religion 100%?? please enlighten me

I'm personally unwilling to go by all the rules of any one religion. My personal beliefs clash with many beliefs of - well to be honest most religions. I would find myself breaking a bunch of rules on a regular basis. Take Islam for example, if I were to say that I am Muslim, then drinking alcohol or gambling is a no no. I do both, even if they both are only to a small degree i'm still breaking the rules. Catholics believe in no sex before marriage, and so on. You can sort of understand where i'm going with this, i'd be hypocritical to say that I'm Muslim since i'm knowingly breaking the rules. I see being religious as being faithful to a set of rules that which are suppose to govern your life. The question is, I guess, can a person not subscribe to a religion and still possibly believe in a god or higher being? Whether I believe in God or not is something that is still up in the air for me, I question my own beliefs fairly often when it comes to that, that's why I don't claim to be atheist. However I reject religion on a personal level not becuase there are hypocrites out there, but becuase I would be a hypocrite if I were to say that I am religious. I do believe however that those out there who say that they are religous, and drink, or have sex before marriage are hypocrites. It comes down to the wording, I believe that if one says they're religous they should stick to it 100%. I have much respect for those people who are devout and do as they're religious says. Hope that clarifies =]

You thiest crack me up..

I am a atheist..

LOL i am godless..

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe I'm personally unwilling to go by all the rules of any one religion. My personal beliefs clash with many beliefs of - well to be honest most religions. I would find myself breaking a bunch of rules on a regular basis. Take Islam for example, if I were to say that I am Muslim, then drinking alcohol or gambling is a no no. I do both, even if they both are only to a small degree i'm still breaking the rules. Catholics believe in no sex before marriage, and so on. You can sort of understand where i'm going with this, i'd be hypocritical to say that I'm Muslim since i'm knowingly breaking the rules. I see being religious as being faithful to a set of rules that which are suppose to govern your life. The question is, I guess, can a person not subscribe to a religion and still possibly believe in a god or higher being? Whether I believe in God or not is something that is still up in the air for me, I question my own beliefs fairly often when it comes to that, that's why I don't claim to be atheist. However I reject religion on a personal level not becuase there are hypocrites out there, but becuase I would be a hypocrite if I were to say that I am religious. I do believe however that those out there who say that they are religous, and drink, or have sex before marriage are hypocrites. It comes down to the wording, I believe that if one says they're religous they should stick to it 100%. I have much respect for those people who are devout and do as they're religious says. Hope that clarifies =]

all i gotta say is...theres "being religious" and just "having faith"

i believe in the catholic faith, yes im a sinner, im no hypocrite to say that i dont commit a single sin adn that i pray 10 times a day, but i try my best to fall in line with the guidelines of my faith..

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew haha, well i could come up with at least 10 examples easily on the top of my head! but i thought i should find some nice percentage as to more prove my point but that site at least showed that very many of our conflicts has a religious background! i have no idea if the site is biased or not, but till you have showed a lot of violent conflicts that has nothing to do with religion i will stand by my argument

well, i read the site and unfortunately it's not proof aof religios based wars:
South Africa Animists & "Witches"
Tibet Buddhists & Communists
and if you cared to read that site more carefully you'd see that first it's mostly low level, and secondly most of them (with a few exemptions) have mixes reasons/backgrounds (racial/ethnical like tamil/bosin/serbian wars for example)
and you said that "90% of all the wars" which these do not account to, because quite frankly i can also easily bring up the most devestaing wars in history: WWI and WWII (how many people were killed?)
how about roman/greek/persian wars?
how about civil wars?
how about war between african countries?
and the list goes on and on.
so one can easily claim that "90% of wars are European based" ? would you agree?
there are fundumental/radical religious people all over the world as there are fundamental/radical secular people who engage in fights and war during the whole history. does that diss religion? does that diss humanity? patriotism? nationality? don't think so.
again i stand by my claim that nowhere in any religion war has been "preached" or been thrwon upon the believers of that religion.

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe Hope that clarifies =]

sorry but had to shorten the text to avoid cluttering the pages!
i totally understand what you say and see your point. i think the word "commitment" sums it up.
m understanding is that you say since you can not commit 100% to a religion then you would not practice it? i hope i'm right
which is a 100% noble thing to say, but if that's the case then saying "i reject religion on a personal level" would not hold true, beacuse you can't play the game according to the game doesn't reject the game (i think it's a matter of choosing the words here).
but just a thought on your case: i think you're more concerned about the seconday things than the principles, you gotta take it from the root and move to the surface.commitment comes second, accepting the dogma and principles comes first, i.e take Islam that you mentioned , banning alcohol and gambling are not the fundamentals of Islam, are they? don't think so they are rules set for the followers (and each one has it's own reasons and historical background) but again if you become a muslim or christian or buddhist is it to commit to rules or to something greater and more profound (let's say truth and faith), simply somwthing to hold on thru your life that gives you answers to your questions?
so i think you should think of the principles and essence of reliosion/god whatever and then worry about secondary things.
and finally to answer your quiestions, yes there are workarounds even in religion itself , something called tolerance and forgiveness.it's not a black and white case which some see it it's the gray shades.
it's the basis of any religion that one is only committed to one's capaticy and strenghts, no more no less. hope that helps a bit

quote:

Originally posted by Espresso well, i read the site and unfortunately it's not proof aof religios based wars: South Africa Animists & "Witches" Tibet Buddhists & Communists

well, most others are religious examples.

also see the foootnote: "We are defining "religion" rather loosely here to include Communism."

quote:

and if you cared to read that site more carefully you'd see that first it's mostly low level, and secondly most of them (with a few exemptions) have mixes reasons/backgrounds (racial/ethnical like tamil/bosin/serbian wars for example)

Yes some of them have other reasons, but for most of them the religion is one of the main reasons for the wars.

quote:

and you said that "90% of all the wars" which these do not account to, because quite frankly i can also easily bring up the most devestaing wars in history: WWI and WWII (how many people were killed?)

True. Although WWII had a religious element in it (killing jews), but its hard to argue that it is religions fault indeed.

quote:

how about roman/greek/persian wars? how about civil wars? how about war between african countries? and the list goes on and on.

Many civil wars starts thanks to religious differences.
Many of the wars in affrica has religion as a main reason for war.

What about all the crusades? What about all the fundie muslims we see today (al queda, Chechnya, etc)? what about the northern ireland conflict, or what about darfur? the list goes on here too!

quote:

so one can easily claim that "90% of wars are European based" ? would you agree?

In a way yes, europeans converting people to christians in all parts of the world, hence creating clashes.

quote:

there are fundumental/radical religious people all over the world as there are fundamental/radical secular people who engage in fights and war during the whole history. does that diss religion? does that diss humanity? patriotism? nationality? don't think so. again i stand by my claim that nowhere in any religion war has been "preached" or been thrwon upon the believers of that religion.

I wouldnt say that religion really preaches violence, but it creates violence. it is not really the fault of religion, but rather of ignorant people, but fact still remains, it is thanks to religious movements we have many of our conflicts.

Perhaps 90% was an exaggeration, but my point was that a great deal of all our conflicts do have a religious element in them!

quote:

Originally posted by Espresso there's a lot of statment being made here, without any proof or rational backing them. 2 major problems here: 1-"religions make us hate" what's your proof for saying that? please provide at least one statement in any of the revelations (from hindu/christian/jewish/musilm,etc books, i.e the vedas/bible/gospels/koran, etc) that actually peaches people to hate or make them hate? 2- people who claim the're "spritual" but not "religious", make an absolute contradictionary claim.let's take a look at the meaning of the word spiritual: spir�i�tu�al (spĭr'ĭ-ch�-əl) adj. 1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material. See synonyms at immaterial. 2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul. 3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific. 4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred. 5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural. n. 1. A religious folk song of African-American origin. 2. A work composed in imitation of such a song. 2. Religious, spiritual, or ecclesiastical matters. Often used in the plural. so basically you're saying i'm religious but i'm not religious?!?! so that logic is obviously flawed. it's alright to question everything and anything ,there's no certainty without doubt, but if you just pick on the trends and what's fashionable and make casual statments you loose your credibility.

quote:

Originally posted by Jem_hadar I disagree entirely. Though I am not spirital at all, I have some friends who are spirital but not religious. they have their OWN beflief about a high power, and its not the god that is celebrated by many vast religions. some think is this an energy flow or whutever flowing thru the universe and connects us all and they are highly spirital in their beliefs around that notion. i woudlnt call that religious. its not exactly fitting into a religion. they aren't claiming the enrgy is god... but they are treating it very spiritually nonetheless

I fall into the categorie that Jem_hadar is talking of.
If you want to refer to me as part of the new age spiritual ppl then by all means put me there...but do not try to fit me into your views of spirtuality. Spirituality today has no connection with religion. I have many friends that are spiritualists that have abilities to heal or see into future events. Some believe they were blessed with some devine power....and others see that they tapped into a hidden internal power that we all posses.

As I said before, I believe in an Avalon life. I believe that it is my energy that links with other energies and that it brings a +/- affect in our lives. This energy travels through us and brings about changes. Perhaps in a way it is similar to the ideals of the Celestine Prophecy but most prefer to believe that god creates or makes things happen in their life. Since I don't believe in one god but I do believe that if a god guides those around me then I must, out of respect for others, open my heart and spirit to accept their beliefs so that we can unify our energies together and form a positive bond while we live in this celestial earth.

BTW...according to Webster's dictionary spiritual is "concerned with religious values" and I believe that I have to be concerned with that in order for our spiritual energies to merge positively.

I hope that this somehow explains it better for you Espresso, because if you still can't understand the ideals behind New Age Spirituality....then frankly I can't help you. I can't help you if your energy closes itself up to only one point of view about life and our purpose on earth.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris T. Dot I believe that to be atheist, you must be ignorant of the many signs, messengers, and miracles that God has shown over the years. Take for instance Padre Pio, who could tell you your sins without ever meeting you, or Edgar Cayce, who in a hypnotic state could give scientific and medical advice/cures for sick people who he never knew just by giving him a name while hypnotized. Doctors would go to him as a resort when they themselves didn't know what to do for a patient, and Edgar himself never remembered what he said or ever studied medicine, yet he did over 40 000 readings documented by scientific associations and proven to have taken place. Take for instance the 3 children of Fatima, who saw Mary and when thousands came to witness, saw the sun dance. Or how about instances when Mother Teresa or another very holy person visited a sick person with cancer or another terminal disease and the next day that person was cured without any scientific explanation. A church in Quebec, St. Anne de Beaupre, has numerous crutches as you walk in lying around left by people who entered the church and couldnt walk and while in there discovered they could walk again. I could give hundreds of examples, most of which many atheists I have met are totally oblivous to yet when I talk to them about these events, they choose to ignore them or not believe me because they have no explanation. I truly cannot understand how atheists think the way they do. It seems like atheists are always looking for some super miracle of God coming down from the heavens without ever looking at how God works in smaller ways all the time in our world. And I'm not bashing you guys at all, but I am looking at documented facts and from an objective point of view, have observed ignorance at times on your part.

Do you think it was a miracle that "mother mary's" image was on a piece of toast?

By the way.. the people you mentioned in your post are probably crack heads like that loser "sylvia browne" who frequents Montel Williams and gives "psychic" anserws like "hes in heaven with god", "there will be an explosion in AMerica soon"

fucking morons

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew well, most others are religious examples. also see the foootnote: "We are defining "religion" rather loosely here to include Communism."

loool are you kidding me?? religion includes communism? that's pure jokes man!
so there seems to be a bit of the problem with your "loose" definition

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Yes some of them have other reasons, but for most of them the religion is one of the main reasons for the wars.

i agree, never said it isn't but you said religion-based , whereas this is one of the reasons , not "the" reason.

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew True. Although WWII had a religious element in it (killing jews), but its hard to argue that it is religions fault indeed.

sorry! but you're trying to impose a reason for a war which is 100% wrong!
"There were many events that led to the start of the World War II. Some of these reasons are the rise of dictatorships in Italy, Germany, and Eastern Europe. After World War I there was a need of dictatorships. There were parliamentary governments that were set up in these countries but rarely lasted. There was a brief Communist agreement, like the military forces and rich landowners who got together to make the first European postwar dictator who was Admiral Miklos Horthy. In Albania, Bulgaria, and Romania, the kings also ran dictatorship. There was less democratic experience and severe economic problems. Many of the Europeans saw one-man rule as the only way to protect instability. To get back on track, Fascist dictatorships ... Showed first 120 words of 1295 Size (words) .."

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Many civil wars starts thanks to religious differences.

not the American civil war!
not in russia:
"Russia signalled her withdrawal from World War One soon after the October Revolution of 1917, and the country turned in on itself with a bloody civil war between the Bolsheviks and the conservative White Guard"

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Many of the wars in affrica has religion as a main reason for war.

examples please? and give me ones stating religion as the "main" reason? (go google if you like )

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew What about all the crusades? What about all the fundie muslims we see today (al queda, Chechnya, etc)? what about the northern ireland conflict, or what about darfur? the list goes on here too!

northern ireland and the crusade wars are indeed religious wars no doubt about it.
for al-Qaeda see this

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew In a way yes, europeans converting people to christians in all parts of the world, hence creating clashes.

wrong again, WWI and WWII had nothing to do with spreading christianty at all (unless you claim Hitler/winston Churchill/Mosilini and communist (athiest) soviet russia were trying to do spread chrisitianty )lmao

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew I wouldnt say that religion really preaches violence, but it creates violence. it is not really the fault of religion, but rather of ignorant people, but fact still remains, it is thanks to religious movements we have many of our conflicts.

so to ethnical and secualr/national and racial movements.there's no reason to say that religion is more responsible than the others.

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Perhaps 90% was an exaggeration, but my point was that a great deal of all our conflicts do have a religious element in them!

not true! religion does not create violence, it's human error/weakness/greediness and seeking power that creates violence, be it religious/athiest or secular.
i think it's pointless and kinda naive to say any single element is the main reason/cause for human wars, wars are much more complcated and happen from mixed backgrounds. and please note i'm not saying religious people are like innocent and hate war, no i'm saying it's human error imposed on whatever the backgroung be (religion/ethnical/racial,etc) people fight for their dogmas/beliefs and that is indispensable and inevitable because everyone thinks they are right and the only right, hence the clashes between different religions(for example the crusade wars) which if you think about it is bound to happen.
( i hope you agree with this at least?)
and also you can't dismiss/reject anything simply because there's a war involved, say if Canada was attacked, then wouldn't we all raise to defend our country? but we're still going to participate in a war (religious and secular) that doesn't make us bad does it?and you won't reject the cause, would you?

All this talk of religion, non-religion, blah blah blah seems to be going around in circles.
I don't think its a matter of looking at a religion or a doctrine or a discipline objectively, critically, or in any other way. To truly understand the basics of life, we need to observe at the most basic level.
Having said that, a simple, irrefutable law is this: When you fully identify with one belief structure, you are automatically Not identifying with others. And therein lies the very roots of conflict. As soon as there is separation at any level, conflict is inevtiable. It emerges almost instantaneously. That is its nature.
Now couple this with the one major goal of all this hoopla: Peace and understanding among individuals. But how can one achieve that through a path that is already in conflict?
That may lead people to denounce it all, hence atheism. But in fact atheism is itself a path. I believe to truly understand all of this, denouncing or embracing will not do.
Now I have no doubt in mind that all the different religions that are there, were all created to help mankind towards a more fulfilling life. However, in this day and age my observations lead me to believe that religion has been warped into an almost unrecognisable state. By us.

thats just my two cents.

oh, and I'm not an atheist. I do follow some Hindu idealogies, but not all.

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King ...By the way.. the people you mentioned in your post are probably crack heads like that loser "sylvia browne" who frequents Montel Williams and gives "psychic" anserws like "hes in heaven with god", "there will be an explosion in AMerica soon" fucking morons

Dude...Edgar Cayce is well documented and scientifically known. He's definately no crack head.
Did you even stop to think about your reply...b/c you've just confirmed his opening point...that athiests can be ignorant

Next time take the time to research and think b4 u post an opinion like that

quote:

Originally posted by b4k-oz I fall into the categorie that Jem_hadar is talking of. If you want to refer to me as part of the new age spiritual ppl then by all means put me there...but do not try to fit me into your views of spirtuality. Spirituality today has no connection with religion. I have many friends that are spiritualists that have abilities to heal or see into future events. Some believe they were blessed with some devine power....and others see that they tapped into a hidden internal power that we all posses.

sorry it's not my view of spiritualty it's the definition of the word spirtuality.the new age cult hijacks religious terms and uses them in their own-defined context:
words like spirit, self realization, devine, celestial, and so on are all defined in religious context and have a very specific meaning.
now if new age ppl want to borrow them, alienate them from their original meaning and use them, well their just fooling themsleves, they are religious terms.
why don't they invent words that describe their beliefs (in the non relgious context)?

quote:

Originally posted by b4k-oz As I said before, I believe in an Avalon life. I believe that it is my energy that links with other energies and that it brings a +/- affect in our lives. This energy travels through us and brings about changes. Perhaps in a way it is similar to the ideals of the Celestine Prophecy but most prefer to believe that god creates or makes things happen in their life. Since I don't believe in one god but I do believe that if a god guides those around me then I must, out of respect for others, open my heart and spirit to accept their beliefs so that we can unify our energies together and form a positive bond while we live in this celestial earth.

with all respect, you can believe whatever you want to, but what you claim is a theory with nothing to back it, and also it's unfortunately irrelavent to my original post, since i claimed that spirtuality pertains to religion and hence one can not claim to be spritual but not religious.you're taliking about god and energy, what's that to do with "spirit" or "soul"? energy is a form of matter , for your information, spirit and soul are not.

quote:

Originally posted by b4k-oz BTW...according to Webster's dictionary spiritual is "concerned with religious values" and I believe that I have to be concerned with that in order for our spiritual energies to merge positively.

what's the source and nature of this energy you talk about? what form does it posses? is it light, heat, nuclear energy? how and when was it created? who controls this energy? can we measure it? could we merge negatively[/QUOTE]

quote:

Originally posted by b4k-oz I hope that this somehow explains it better for you Espresso, because if you still can't understand the ideals behind New Age Spirituality....then frankly I can't help you. I can't help you if your energy closes itself up to only one point of view about life and our purpose on earth.

thanks for your concerns, but i'm familiar with the concepts of the new age movement, it's based on borrowing religious concepts and using every possible way to explain them , with focus on avoiding to call it religion (FYI all the concepts you mentioned here about union of energy are borrowed from hinduism Vedanta: the puruna and prakshati in the Opanishads, they've been renamed and simplified so western modern man can understand it , thanks to Carl Gustav Yung!). if i need to know about the universe i'll go straight to the source, not a second hand digested version. hope that explains.

quote:

Originally posted by bARTovsky All this talk of religion, non-religion, blah blah blah seems to be going around in circles. I don't think its a matter of looking at a religion or a doctrine or a discipline objectively, critically, or in any other way. To truly understand the basics of life, we need to observe at the most basic level. Having said that, a simple, irrefutable law is this: When you fully identify with one belief structure, you are automatically Not identifying with others. And therein lies the very roots of conflict. As soon as there is separation at any level, conflict is inevtiable. It emerges almost instantaneously. That is its nature. Now couple this with the one major goal of all this hoopla: Peace and understanding among individuals. But how can one achieve that through a path that is already in conflict? That may lead people to denounce it all, hence atheism. But in fact atheism is itself a path. I believe to truly understand all of this, denouncing or embracing will not do. Now I have no doubt in mind that all the different religions that are there, were all created to help mankind towards a more fulfilling life. However, in this day and age my observations lead me to believe that religion has been warped into an almost unrecognisable state. By us. thats just my two cents. oh, and I'm not an atheist. I do follow some Hindu idealogies, but not all.

very well said, that's what i trying to say with this poor english of mine i think you pinpointed the very essence of conflicts.

quote:

Originally posted by b4k-oz Dude...Edgar Cayce is well documented and scientifically known. He's definately no crack head. Did you even stop to think about your reply...b/c you've just confirmed his opening point...that athiests can be ignorant Next time take the time to research and think b4 u post an opinion like that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Cayce

Read this and think b4 u post

LOL, the elitism in this thread is unbelievable.

You're all going to Hell.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie You're all going to Hell.

i thought we're already there?!?!

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie You're all going to Hell.

if it's open bar, i'm there.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie You're all going to Hell.

I'm on the guestlist,
do I get line bypass?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.