(September 11, 2015 at 1:52 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:(September 11, 2015 at 1:31 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: I'm not really worried. I'd be surprised if I found one atheist who seriously disagreed with my statement.
Ace, if you do some searching, you will find numerous threads in which people make precisely that same point: atheism =/= science.
Though many atheists are metaphysical naturalists and would assert a close relationship between atheism and science, not all are. I would go so far as to say that a majority of atheists are likely agnostic on the question of metaphysical naturalism, while at the same time embracing methodological naturalism. Hell, one could be an atheist and a full-blown New Age, astrology-believing loon. There is no real content to the concept of 'atheist' other than 'doesn't believe in gods'.
That's why I go on, as often as I'm given space to do so, to tell people that I'm an agnostic atheist and a Secular Humanist.
To those who don't know what all that means, or to those whose preachers deliberately conflate the terms in order to score points on behalf of their flocks of congregants, it may sound redundant... but in order, they are: a "knowledge-philosophy", a conclusion, and a specific set of principles which most-closely match my own personal set, enough so that I am comfortable adopting the title.
In Christian circles, one might say, equivalently, that they are a revelationist theist and a Southern Baptist Christian.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
