Observations On Atheism Part II - God And The Bible

[lukec]

Okay. Tell me what makes more sense to you.

Once upon a time when man was trying to figure everything out they - not having thought of Ocham's Razor decided to create a god that created them in order to control people and failed to do so so it took off as a good idea that is still around today but - we who call ourselves atheists having now figured that all out and who can't stand all of the evil things that people have done with this god person and must devote our lives to liberate the theist! They are so nice.

Or

We the atheist hate this fantasy world you the theist have created and want to destroy you and your fairy tales.

---

I'd like to know how atheism is a class struggle too, actually?

What sort of struggle would you call it?

I don't know, actually. Not a class struggle, though, since believers and non-believers are spread out among "classes" (Although there is evidence that suggests that more educated people are less likely to believe). Myself, I've never really felt there needed to be a struggle, per se, between Atheists and Theists, although I feel that (as I've said before) the teaching of creationism (not biblical-specific, any origin myth) should be fought. Of course, it's often true that people with opposing views especially of a theological nature are bound to argue, and perhaps you could call that a struggle. But there is not, to my knowledge, an organized group of atheists (anti-theists?) who are actively struggling to "destroy" religion.

In the anceint Hebrew / Aramaic / Greek Latin and more modern English languages the word god means simply anything or anyone that is mighty or venerated. So - if a guy picks up a stick and says: "This is my God!" there is no way to deny him. It is his god.

Yes. If you want to argue semantics, you're right. But in that you are implying that believed gods are real, which I feel undermines the whole point of a "God." I could say that there is a ghost following me around, and that would not make it right, that would not make it so. Maybe in my mind there is a ghost, and he's a nice guy, but for everyone else, is he real? I don't think so.

Theism is the belief in god. Atheism is the non belief in god. Which one makes sense? Neither because they don't know that which they believe or disbelieve. This means that modern day atheists and theists are as - no, actually more ignorant and superstitious than the primitive people that wrote the Bible because . . . well . . . at least they knew what the hell they were talking about, eh?

Why doesn't non-belief make sense? I know what I don't believe: I do not believe in a supernatural force, being, fate, entity which guides my life or has ever interfered with the universe. Plain and simple. Now if you can explain to me why I don't know what I am talking about, on a basic level, I'd be glad to hear it.

So what could be the problem between the two? A sort of xenophobic class struggle or simple legislation? You tell me? Does it make sense to be an Atheist which is really nothing more than not believing what someone else believes while at the same time not bothering to educate themselves on what that is? Tradition? Culture? Social? Political?

Education, Homosexuality, Abortion? Stem cell research? Am I getting warm.

I'm not really sure what you mean by the simple legislation bit- how would that be a problem exactly? Could you rephrase? Now, your definition of an atheist is "really nothing more than not believing what someone else believes while at the same time not bothering to educate themselves on what this is" and I strongly disagree. I do not believe in god. But, I am in the process of reading the bible, and the book of mormon, because I am actually trying to learn. Generalized statements which are not really founded in truth are a bit... useless, don't you think?
As for the other points you raise- why would an atheist care about these things? Well, for some of them I do care- important issues to me include tradition, culture, social ones (political? not really, I've never been a political-minded person.). Education, homosexuality, abortion, stem cell research... these things are all issues that I think should be important to everyone. Education- it's important that the education system improves, and stays grounded in reason, and should not be teaching "fairytales" as facts to children. Homosexuality is another hot topic, but I think in a way only because it shouldn't be. The church, or religious people who are against homosexuals, are in the wrong. They shouldn't care what people do with their own lives, that's just silly. And the bible is the root of that homophobia for many christians, I think, which is a problem. Abortion is another issue where many religious people would be on the other side of the issue from me- I think that the mother should be given the right to choose. Stem cell research? Yeah, I'm for that too, although many religious leaders are not.

It really is very simple. If someone believes in a fairy tale one doesn't form a group to counter it. They let them believe what they want. What would be the point in devoting one moment of your time to anything more than thinking to yourself: "I don't believe in that fairy tale" unless it were motivated by some political agenda?

I agree. Completely. A group should not be formed. But I come on sites like this because I know that it's not only atheists on here- there're people like you who I can talk to and get a different idea. This website is not the germ of a resistence group. It, and others like it, are simply places where like-minded people can meet. Before I started looking, I felt like I was one of the few atheists around, and it was nice to have some feedback and realize that other people felt the same way I did. But I don't see it as a group, more of a discussion. I don't meet on here and plan to do anything against religion, it is only a discussion. Where is the political agenda in that?