So an Ancient Greek sacrifices a fatted calf to Athena so she’ll aks Zeus to lay off the storms and that’s polythesim, but if a modern Catholic prays to Mother Mary to intercede on his behalf regarding rent that’s monotheism. It all seems like a bunch of semantics thrown up to convince people that they follow a monotheistic faith.
Respecting the work of a human being is different from venerating a supernatural being. I can respect what Jesus the Christ did without thinking for an instant he’s supernatural. Plenty of people respect Thomas Jefferson. Does that mean they are worshipping him as a deity? No.
As has already been explained to you (but it can’t hurt to repeat), atheists are not “anti” any specific religion. They just don’t believe in a god – any god. Not the god of Christians or the god of Islam or whatever.
Well, hell, how often do you “hear of atheists” around here? It’s not like the major news organizations cover atheism very well. Unless you happen to specifically participate in message boards dedicated to that sort of thing (or something of the sort), it’s not surprising that you’ve never heard of them. However, I know of a list run by a Turkish atheist; I’ve seen newsletters printed by Indian atheists; etc.
First, you’re not correct. Second, what does this have to do with the price of tea in China? What an illogical leap (not to mention that “Christianity” is not a religion in and of itself – there are so many different variants with different amounts of tolerance).
I think the essence of any religion is the belief in a subjective, supernatural order of existance.
Now, wouldn’t you define the concept of Karma as “subjective”? Or wouldn’t you call reincarnation “supernatural” (or at least “unproven by scientific means”)? Correct me if I’m wrong, but those are the two cornerstones of Buddhism.
As for Taoism, though, I’m not quite sure. I’l have to get back to you about that.
What if there are fifty non-white atheists in the thread? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the thread for the sake of the fifty non-white atheists in it?
I thought most Mexicans were caucasian. (At least, that’s what the Year 2000 U.S. Census implied – they had one set of check-boxes for your “race”, and a totally separate question asking “Are you hispanic?”, implying that the usual Hispanic was “white”.)
Tracer, Mexico and points south are populated mostly by hispanics and latinos, but not all hispanics and latinos are caucasian. There was much more mixing of culture and blood between the natives and the colonistas than in Norteamerica. Add to that a later influx in many places of African blood, and you end up with the very sexy mocha color considered typical of latino skin. There are many “white” hispanics, and many “non-white.” Largely in the EEUU it’s a matter of how one chooses to mark one’s census form.
Dunno about your dictionary, grienspace, but here’s another one:
(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition. 1992, Houghton Mifflin Company.)
Let’s be polite now, shall we? If you want to know more about atheism, poke around Great Debates a bit. Don’t make assumptions without knowledge. We’re here to fight ignorance, not perpetuate it.
Webster is not the fount of all knowledge you know. It relays the definitions that people use by and large, but it is not a particularly reliable source of philosophical discourse. If you want to be hidebound and insist on only the most simplistic definition given you in the midst of the Great Debates forum, you will not make much headway.
Atheists do indeed subdivide into the strong/weak categories, only one of which denies God, even if you refuse to accept it.
Please check out the Encyclopedia Britannica on atheism or the Alt.Atheism FAQ for a defintion of atheism that is more than seven words. Heck, the Webster’s definition of “Christian” (“one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ”) could conceivably include the group “Atheists for Jesus”, who by their own admission “believe in the message of love and kindness put forth by Jesus.” I’d suggest you depend on resources a little less space-limited than the dictionary (and ones that are written by actual members of the group that you wish to know about, or at the very least those who have studied the matter in-depth) if you want an educated definition of a group’s beliefs.
I merely suggested it as a point of debate. It occurs to me that a forum like this one in Iran would certainly not produce any atheistic responses. I mean, look at Salmon Rushdie. I mean in most parts of the world you don’t go telling the tribe that their religion is full of shit and get away with it.
That’s one good argument for the separation of church and state.
One point to consider though is that Islam is not confined to the fundamentalist type practiced in Iran. There are plenty of Muslims that were appalled more by the fatwah against Rushdie than by anything that Rushdie wrote. Unfortunately, fundamentalism within Islam seems to make up a much larger portion of believers than their Christian counterparts.
I didn’t know there was an Atheist group with a set of beliefs.Do you have chapters all over the world? I don’t want to offend you people, so from here on in be informed that when I used the word atheist heretofore, I meant “one who actively denies the existance of God or gods” I’ll call such a person an anti-believer. O.K. ?
Atheism isn’t a “set of beliefs”. It may be either a lack of belief in God, an active disbelief in certain gods and lacking belief in all gods, or an active disbelief in all gods. Nothing else is required to be considered an atheist; it’s not like Christianity or Judaism where you get a whole set of beliefs packaged together. There is no monolithic atheist group that dictates what an athiest is; the defintion of “atheist” that I refer to is simply the most common (and IMHO, accurate) one hammered out by theists and atheists alike to accurately divide atheists, theists and agnostics up. Some people still insist that atheists must actively disbelieve in all Gods, but that’s not an attitude I’ve seen held by people who have done serious study of modern atheism.
I suppose there are. In my experience, atheists tend not be be joiners and it seems to me rather odd to have a group who all they have in common is they lack belief in God. I am unaware of any atheist group in my area and I know of no one who belongs to such a group.
If you like, although “hard atheist” is the term generally used for a person that professes that. And if you’re talking to them, there’s scant few on this MB.
I don’t want to offend you people, so from here on in be informed that when I used the word atheist heretofore, I meant “one who actively denies the existance of God or gods” I’ll call such a person an anti-believer. O.K. ?