h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<>

You are presuming that God exists and everything and everyone else is seen in relation to this supposed 'fact'.

For many it is not a fact, not even remotely imaginable.

What right do you have to presuppose YOUR version of religion and God should be the one to label others by?


az

<<<> SoRB

No I'm not. I've seen lives changed and released from various addictions because of becoming a Christian.>>

I've seen lives changed due to deaths in the family. I've seen lives changed due to introduction of various chemicals. Change isn't necessarily positive.

<<<> Blatherskite

Sounds like it happened against your will.>>

The concept of will is, in this case, meaningless. All parents imprint their personal beliefs in their children. Parents are the first source, and young children believe their parents are the final authority on all things, including knowledge. Questioning and discovery come later.

<>

That's sort of the point, isn't it? In any case, all this god character has to do is demonstrate his divinity in a way that can't be questioned. It doesn't even have to be something big. If, perhaps, he could produce another hat like the one my wife lost at the amusement park, I'd be convinced, especially since I haven't told him what the hat looked like.

<>

Believing something is not the same thing as a religion. For instance, I believe you're a real human being who is reading and responding to this, but I don't genuflect in your direction. I believe most of my tax dollars are going to waste, but I don't attend weekly meetings at the Church of Damn the Government. I believe Dr. Pepper tastes better than Pepsi, but I don't stand on a busy sidewalk extolling the virtues of the one true cola.

We believe millions of things, but the only beliefs which comprise a religion are beliefs in a divine being. Atheists have no belief in a divine being, and therefore no religion.

<>

But with these changes, positive is putting it mildly.

<>

My father is very hostile against any form of religion. My sister is hostile too. Strange, don't you think, that I haven't just accepted his version of things? Ok, so when someone's 3 years old, they're going to see things the way their parents or whoever have presented them. how many children follow every single thing their parents do and believe?

So, NPY, you're trying to imply that people who've "found" religion have changed for the better? I can give examples quite to the contrary, my mother for example, people who gave up one form of addiction for another, and did A LOT more harm in the process. When my mother drank, she did me no harm. When my mother "found Jesus", she became a raving, abusive sociopath.

Most children *do* believe what thier parents teach them. I believed the religious stuff my mother told me, until I left home, got into a public school, and learned better for myself.

<> (NPY)

Della often uses this similar argument, having been brought up by atheists/agnostics, whatever, and she turned out Christian - as if that in itself was some sort of miracle.

I don't find it strange at all that you haven't just accepted your father's version of things. Mine was a racist, bigoted, violent alcoholic and I never accepted any of those things. He was also Catholic (well, so to speak) and I never accepted that either.

So, your point was . . .?


az

It is true that children listen to their parents. I'm not about to try and say otherwise. What I am saying is that, as you have pointed out, children can change their minds.

I'm not "trying to imply" anything. I've seen it. I *know* it happens.

One thing I should say is that Christianity isn't just a "religion" to be "found". It's more than just following rules, going to church and reciting set prayers like it's a magic formula.

Obviously, I don't know anything about your mother and your relationship with her.

There's a family that go to my church. The father drank and from what I understand this had a very negative effect on the whole family. He became a Christian through his brother, and soon afterwards the rest of the family had made the same decision. He has stopped drinking, and works to help others recover from alcohol misuse. The whole family's been changed so much and it's all positive.

There are so many people in my church whose lives have been changed for the better by becoming Christians. If you want more stories, contact the church. http://www.causewaycoastvineyard.com/contact.asp

Christianity is *not* a religion. It's relationship, it's life changing.

NPY wrote:

" if a religion like Christianity is believing in a divine being etc, and athoesm is not beieving in those things, tthen athiesm can be described as believing that there is *not* a God,"

But then, bizarrely, also wrote:

"Christianity is *not* a religion"

I do so wish that you Christians could get their stories straight. Oh, and do a course on very, very basic logic while you're at it.

Specifically, I suggest you take a little time to think about whether YOU think there's a difference between:

a: not believing there's a god, and
b: believing there's not a god.

You see, YOUR definition of atheism is the latter. And it absolutely *requires* there to be a /concept/ of a god, in order for one to have a negative belief towards it.

The first definition, by contrast, does not require the existence of a god concept. It is simply the absence of an attitude towards an irrelevance.

Obviously someone with your prejudices tends to see atheists as being defined as in (b) - indeed, your very use of the word "atheist" gives it away. "Atheist" is a word which requires theism, the concept of gods as something to be believed in, to be "a".

I am not an atheist. I'm am a rationalist, and YOU, my friend, are an irrationalist, or if you prefer, a superstitionist. I do NOT have a religion. You, despite what you might try to claim in your last post, do.

I might also point out that in claiming that you're not in a religion, you're in a *relationship*, you're starting to sound like Justin the Preacher, well known nutter of this parish...

SoRB

Not panickkingiynignyinging<<> Alfster

Well if a religion like Christianity is believing in a divine being etc, and athoesm is not beieving in those things, tthen athiesm can be described as believing that there is *not* a God, etc. It comprised beliefs of a religion nature in that they hold a belif that God does not exist.>

Although this comment has been sufficiently deconstructed by SorB and Az may I just add: b*ll*ocks! When has not believing in somethign EVER been a religion?

< I've seen lives changed and released from various addictions because of becoming a Christian.>

And, when has replacing one addiction with another been a positive thing?

The day an 'athiest', and I use that term just so that YOU can understand where I am coming from, is heard on Thought for the Day, then I may believe that Athiesm is a religion. Unfortunately, as long as that slot is still 'Inane Ramblings for the Day' I am quite happy for the mrons who invite such idiots as Anne Atkins on the slot to ignore rational people like me. Did you listen to that vacuous bint this morning? I long for a method of turning my brain off at night so I can go to sleep - I need to get a tape of her most inane vacuous 'sermons'. Not the really dumb ones that are ill thought out and cause offence to any right thinking person of course.

You, Christians, are the only people who say atheism is a religion. YOU arethe only ones who call people who do not believe in the supernatural hokum. What do you think YOUR God would say about Christians creating another religion along side the 'true' religion? Pretty darn p*ssed off I would say. And soemwhat ironic that it is his true flock are the ones who actually 'believe' athiesm as a religion exists because you may call me an Athiest but I am not.

I believe this line of conversation is geting a little bit to radical...

We all must be open to other people's views. There are not THE atheists, THE catholics and all THE. There are many beliefs, each person believes in something and that something is unique for that kind of person. We mustn't make general rule of a single person's ideas.

We can respect the beliefs of others, and we should in order to live without discordance. Why become angered by a name. If we believe in something, that belief is for us, not to others to name it. The atheism, budism, catholicism, islamism,.... in these days have their borders very dim.

Every generation, or from a dozen to a dozen of generations, our knowledge, values and mind develops, and also our concept of belief. If lives are changed in a positive way i simply don't care in what they did to become better.

We all believe in something... it's a paradox, because even if we call ourselfes not believers, we become a believer.

'Athiests' do not really 'believe' in anything apart from when we die that is it.

There is no belief in just being human, breathing, eating and dying. The problem is people who do believe in the supernatural and the rules other humans have written down as from the 'Gods' say this is a belief as it does not make sense to them that someone can simply 'be'.

There are two reasons why 'athiests' go on: a) that just getting on with our lives has not one jot of belief in it and b) the people who do believe in the 100's of gods that seem to co-exist and co-create seem to believe that everyone else should live by their rules and their believes even when they are nonsensical, sexist and racist - and that really p*sses off us 'non-believers'.

Alfster.

As i said: you are a "non-believer" believer, more better called a agnostic.

Your point is taken.

And for me, a person cannot simply "be" for itself. A human mind and body is a result of a hollistic (more simply: society, biological and psichological prism) transformation all it's life.

Some athiests do seem to hold their beliefs with almost religious fervour. It may not be entirely innaccurate to call (some forms of) atheism religious (in some senses of the word).



"... the sort of athiest who does not so
much disbelieve in God as personally
dislike Him."

George Orwell, Down and Out in Paris and London, 1933.



As for NPY's apparent contradiction, I think he (?) was trying to say that Christianity is not *just* a religion or that it is not a religion in the church-service-and-candles sense of the word. (Some groups are very low on ritual.) The phrasing was careless, yes.

TRiG.

And since I've looked up one quote I can't resist throwing in a couple more from the same page and correcting the one I half-remembered earlier. I think they're quite relevant, actually.

Simon darling, I'm afraid you will have to
speak to the children. I caught Tristram
believing in God yesterday.

Marc, The Trendy Ape, cartoon, 1968.



It's an interesting view of atheism, as a
sort of *crutch* for those who can't stand
the reality of God.

Tom Stoppard, Jumpers, 1972.



Someone asked [Bertrand] Russell at
some meeting: 'Lord Russell, what will
you say when you die and are brought
face to face with your Maker?' He replied
without hesitation: 'God,' I shall say,
'God, why did you make the evidence for
your existence so insufficient?'

A.J. Ayer, quoted in the Standard, 1984.

<>

You accept that *you* don't accept your father's view of things, but at the same time, you refuse to believe that NPY and I come from families and fathers who oppose(d) religion! Not very consistent of you, azahar!

Della, you totally misread what I wrote. I said I didn't think it strange at all that NPY didn't believe her father's version of things and commented that I also don't believe my father's version of things. Likewise, I said you often used this argument as if it *were* something strange, almost a miracle, that you ended up Christian.

Please point out the part of my post where I said I 'refused to believe' that you both come from families in which the father wasn't religious.

Perhaps you'd be less likely to put words in my mouth if you read my posts more carefully and without personal bias.


az

Kandarian



I am definitely not an agnostic thank you very much. One side or the other not wishy washy foot in both courts.



You could alos call it a hollistic trinity.

Your definition of being is a good one. I like it. And is pretty much how I would describe a person. by saying a person can simply 'be' I mean thye are not influenced, controlled or made by supernatural beings etc. Influenced, controlled and made by other humans and the societal framework there-of certainly. But that pretty much is an integral part of just 'being' human and you pretty much have no choice over the matter.

The only changes I've seen it make have been for the worse. I've seen previously open-minded people turned into hateful bigots who spew a lot of nonsense.

I feel sorry for them.

<> (NPY)

For you Christianity may also be a relationship, a life changing thing, etc. But it is also most definitely a religion.

Dictionary definition of religion:
- belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny
- any formal or institutionalised expression of such belief

I'm afraid you cannot argue that Christianity is *not* a religion, though you seem to be saying that, for you, it is something more than that. Fair enough. But it is still a religion.


az

<> (PC)

It seems my experience with Christians has been much more positive than yours. The majority of Christians I personally know are decent and caring people. Including Noggin's sister and brother-in-law, who happens to be a Christian minister.

When they were here visiting us a couple of weeks ago we told them how we'd met on hootoo, on a thread discussing whether God was fact or fiction. And the brother-in-law laughed, asking what the outcome of *that* discussion had been and laughed even harder when we told him that after more than 25,000 posts the jury was still out.

I've always said that a person's choice to believe in whatever god they prefer is something I respect. But for some people, being CHRISTIAN (an example, it could be anything) seems to take over and it becomes the main way they identify themselves. And I think that when this happens that you can end up with very defensive and narrow-minded thinking.

It seems to me that people who are secure in who they are and what they believe do not have to beat others over the head with it constantly. And this goes for any personal belief. For example, I know some friends who are feminists (both female and male) and some are quite balanced and reasonable, others are quite extreme and, frankly, tedious.

Extremists of any kind seem to have forgotten the 'big picture', you know what I mean?


az

>But for some people, being CHRISTIAN (an example, it could be anything) seems to take over and it becomes the main way they identify themselves. And I think that when this happens that you can end up with very defensive and narrow-minded thinking<

I think you have described exactly what I have been trying to say! Thanks, Az.

The church my mother forced us to attend was made up largely of people who *defined* themselves- their entire being!- as "christian", as if they ceased to exist as a human being and a member of society. Many of those people developed an attitude that they were somehow "better" or "right". My mother, for example, began hating women who worked outside of the home and in ploitics, as this church taught that women are somehow "subservient" to men! (It would be laughable, if not so frightening!) I saw a young woman's family turn their backs on her because she terminated a pregnancy when she was in no position to care for a child. I saw a man quit a decent job- forcing his family nto poverty- because he felt it would be "sinful" to "fellowship" with non-christian people. These are definitely life-changing events- changes not for the better!

I think you are right, that it is accepting this one-dimensional "definition" of oneself that leads to the narrow-minded, defensive, even downright bigoted and hateful thinking.

As long as one's beliefs- be they illogical, irrational, and imaginary- don't have any effect on me, then I've no problem whatsoever with whatever someone wants to believe.

As for the original question, it's never going to happen, so it's of no concern at all to me.