Support NeoGAF

[Anaxagoras]

"There is no God" assumes knowledge, knowledge and evidence we do not have.

context context context.

''I will meet you at 4:00 tomorrow''
- you don't have any evidence that you will be alive tomorrow but you do this for practicality, you are also not claiming knowledge and certainty.

''My brother can't swim''
- Just because you haven't seen him swim properly doesn't mean he can't, practicality.

''David doesn't have a cat''
-Again, no absolute certainty, its just a more practical way than saying ''I am pretty sure that David doesn't have a cat.''

 

[dr3upmushroom]

Why is this thread still chocked up on the idea of a god, hell and heaven... Those are moot.

 

[Anaxagoras]

yes the user name . i still refer you to your user name nizar.

Why do you have to be a pain in the ass?
You know I changed my user name for a reason, just stop doing this please.

 

[AFreak]

I think they're equally ridiculous because, while Santa Claus is a fairy tale that revolves around giving gifts to people, the idea of God is an attempt to explain our universe and how we came about. I find it ridiculous to say "there is no God" because we don't know the origins of life. It could have been God, it could have been something else. I don't know, and I don't care.

"There is no God" assumes knowledge, knowledge and evidence we do not have.

I can see where you are coming from, but it wasn't just about Santa Claus that we can ay definitively no on yet we have no empirical data tot he contrary.

One example i gave was to the Pink invisible unicorn, the teapot revolving around Saturn, etc.

Let's go one further and take Scientology as the main example. It tries to explain our universe and the origins of life, but you will not find many sane Americans saying that Scientology is probably wrong due tot he lack of knowledge and evidence that it exists.

No, many would give it no second thought and most here would say definitively that Scientology is wrong, so why can Scientology be definitively wrong (even though we don't have the knowledge and evidence to its wrongness), yet god cannot also be definitively wrong given the same exact notions.

 

[FunkyMunkey]

Einstein was functionally an atheist.

... secularist.

Haha I thought he was more agnostic-like?

Unless we're saying that and atheism fall under the same umbrella, which isn't right in my opinion.

 

[Anaxagoras]

I do have my own religious journey story that I'd like to share with you guys later, since my head hurts and I don't want to write any long posts.

I am looking forwards to read it.

 

[LCGeek]

No, many would give it no second thought and most here would say definitively that Scientology is wrong, so why can Scientology be definitively wrong (even though we don't have the knowledge and evidence to its wrongness), yet god cannot also be definitively wrong given the same exact notions.

Time and the fact most of scientology is a ripoff of sci fi and new age mythology with alien conspiracy mixed in. Even for the religious there is a limit of a bullshit you can accept young and old from an abstract over what you can find out about scientology. There is more to hang scientology with and it has very few defenders in comparison to regular religion.

 

[LCGeek]

Haha I thought he was more agnostic-like?

Unless we're saying that and atheism fall under the same umbrella, which isn't right in my opinion.

Didn't he say the following "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."...

Einstein and religion always seemed cut and dry despite how both sides have tried to butcher his views on the subject.

 

[-x.Red.x-]

Pure coincidence or the cause and the effect?

My honest answer would be Coincidence BUT if i FEEL that if I didn't believed I wouldn't got what I needed.

If God asked you to kill your child, would you do it?

No.

because that be viewed as a "test" for my belief right?


First I know that God won't come up on me directly and ask me in a dream or what-not
I believe that god would give us these "test" in a realistic way.

I won't do it because it shows how far I can go for personal feelings and belief.
it's hard for me to answer your question.

in other words, no because I will gave what god really wants from me. "Good actions"
killing is not one of them.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Haha I thought he was more agnostic-like?

Unless we're saying that and atheism fall under the same umbrella, which isn't right in my opinion.

I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.
—Albert Einstein

In a 1954 letter, he wrote, "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly.”[74] In a letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind, Einstein remarked, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."

 

[soul creator]

I don't necessarily agree with that. One can say definitively that Santa Claus does not exist because of no substantial evidence to the contrary, so why can't the same be true with god? Why does he get a pass and we must say "It is probable that there is no good." Instead of being able to say it definitively like with Santa Claus, Pink Invisible Unicorn, etc.

Because either it should be able to be a definitive no given the evidence provided, or we should be saying all things have a probability of existence when they can not be proven otherwise.

Yeah, that's always struck me as weird as well. When speaking about invisible, all powerful beings who can communicate with humans telepathically, I have to get completely technical and say "well, he might exist, I just think it's unlikely" when talking about god, or else I get accused of being some sort of close-minded atheist fundamentalist.

But if we're talking about any other version of an invisible, all powerful telepath, one that's not associated with an ancient religion, no one raises an issue if I say "I know he/she/it doesn't exist".

Now, as you implied, technically none of us can ever really 100% "know" anything, since it's not like we can evaluate the entire universe. So I don't really have a problem with that viewpoint in the context of an abstract philosophical discussion. But in normal day to day conversation, saying "I know god doesn't exist" isn't really any worse than saying "I know human-created fictional being #1,235 doesn't exist". The only reason why it's considered worse is because we are taught to treat gods as "special", even though the concept itself isn't actually that different from tons of other things we have no problem rejecting.

Of course, one common response people usually make to this is to start defining god in completely vague, abstract, and slippery ways, to the point where you can't really say anything about it at all. Which is fine and all, but let's not act like that's what most people mean when they say the word "god". God and religion didn't become such popular concepts by being inactive and hands-off :lol

I think they're equally ridiculous because, while Santa Claus is a fairy tale that revolves around giving gifts to people, the idea of God is an attempt to explain our universe and how we came about. I find it ridiculous to say "there is no God" because we don't know the origins of life. It could have been God, it could have been something else. I don't know, and I don't care.

"There is no God" assumes knowledge, knowledge and evidence we do not have.

This kind of ties into my last point. When I say "there is no god", I'm assuming the normal, day-to-day definition that 90% (pulled out of ass, but likely!) of people in my society mean when they say the word "god". A conscious being with specific thoughts and emotions, who is invisible, can practice telepathy and has universe-creating superpowers, and possibly has special feelings for humanity. I have no problem saying "I know it doesn't exist". Could I be wrong? Sure. I could be wrong when it comes to the thousands of other deities and fictional beings I "know" doesn't exist as well. But I'll change my position when the overwhelming evidence against that type of god idea changes, lol. And of course, this doesn't literally mean I've somehow explored the entire universe to reach my conclusion.

If we're just talking about any vague and generic possible beginning to the universe, why even involve a loaded term like god? I think that just confuses things even more. I know that the whole "personal God" idea gets looked at as some sort of strawman, but that's how the vast majority of people have viewed God over the years.

 

[AFreak]

Time and the fact most of scientology is a ripoff of sci fi and new age mythology with alien conspiracy mixed in. Even for the religious there is a limit of a bullshit you can accept young and old from an abstract over what you can find out about scientology. There is more to hang scientology with and it has very few defenders in comparison to regular religion.

That's true, but that also doesn't make the notion "There is no God" ridiculous, just that the general consensus has not deemed it worthy yet to give it that label.

 

[malingenie]

why? and do you know who Anaxagoras is?

Back when I was a kid all I knew was that this dude said everything is everything and thought it was cool, but then in college I learned more about him in the intro to philo class and thought he was a psychedelic god. Plus his name is badass.

 

[Anaxagoras]

My honest answer would be Coincidence BUT if i FEEL that if I didn't believed I wouldn't got what I needed.

I agree.

No.

because that be viewed as a "test" for my belief right?

First I know that God won't come up on me directly and ask me in a dream or what-not
I believe that god would give us these "test" in a realistic way.

I won't do it because it shows how far I can go for personal feelings and belief.
it's hard for me to answer your question.

in other words, no because I will gave what god really wants from me. "Good actions"
killing is not one of them.

What if it was an order and not a test, no misunderstanding and no silly games, would you do it?

 

[malingenie]

My honest answer would be Coincidence BUT if i FEEL that if I didn't believed I wouldn't got what I needed.



No.

because that be viewed as a "test" for my belief right?


First I know that God won't come up on me directly and ask me in a dream or what-not
I believe that god would give us these "test" in a realistic way.

I won't do it because it shows how far I can go for personal feelings and belief.
it's hard for me to answer your question.

in other words, no because I will gave what god really wants from me. "Good actions"
killing is not one of them.

Ya dude, but abraham was seconds away from killing his son and God was like 'That'l do pig"

 

[Zero Tolerance]

​

What does that last symbol stand for?

 

[-x.Red.x-]

There was a short time in my life when I thought something like this might've happened to me. But it all kind of fell apart when I thought about it... My problem back then was pretty freaking minor. Nothing serious. It could've just as well gotten resolved without God, but that's not what made me dismiss this experience. There are people in this world with far more serious problems than any I've ever experienced and with far more faith that God would save them than I ever did, and yet they receive no help. They pray for weeks or months, but they still die of cancer. A few children have died in the last few years because instead of hospital treatment, their parents opted to pray for their recovery. I pray once and my little problem is resolved? What kind of God does that?

This also pisses me off, I hate this so much you don't understand.

The only thing I can say is
destiny

Let's say those people lived and done something worst for everyone.
or
by having those people not die, certain family members wouldn't have a "revelation"
either turning atheist or what-ever. (that's contradiction but what can I say)

 

[Dever]

My honest answer would be Coincidence BUT if i FEEL that if I didn't believed I wouldn't got what I needed.



No.

because that be viewed as a "test" for my belief right?


First I know that God won't come up on me directly and ask me in a dream or what-not
I believe that god would give us these "test" in a realistic way.

I won't do it because it shows how far I can go for personal feelings and belief.
it's hard for me to answer your question.

in other words, no because I will gave what god really wants from me. "Good actions"
killing is not one of them.

Isn't "good actions" defined as those God wants you to do? Or is there some moral standard beyond God? So if God asked you to kill your kid, that'd be the good action.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

What does that last symbol stand for?

Trekkies.

 

[Zero Tolerance]

Trekkies.

Makes sense. They have a very large fandom. So are cults considered in this topic too?

 

[LCGeek]

That's true, but that also doesn't make the notion "There is no God" ridiculous, just that the general consensus has not deemed it worthy yet to give it that label.

I wasn't making that assertion myself but should've cleared up my position. I find useless to say the phrase because all it will do is stir a pot that is best left alone or that is said to someone already on the same philosophical frequency. Usually it's said from a subjective perspective that will always get distorted.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

Makes sense. They have a very large fandom. So are cults considered in this topic too?

Arguably that's what the various religions are.

 

[-x.Red.x-]

I agree.



What if it was an order and not a test, no misunderstanding and no silly games, would you do it?

Nope. because then that's not the god I believe in.

I will decline and walk away?

but the question you're asking for is

would I give up what I believe in?

no, I believe God is there for our happiness, if i kill my child. I doubt I will be the same.

 

[AFreak]

I wasn't making that assertion myself but should've cleared up my position. I find useless to say the phrase because all it will do is stir a pot that is best left alone or that is said to someone already on the same philosophical frequency. Usually it's said from a subjective perspective that will always get distorted.

Yeah, I wasn't directing my answer back at you, but at your post. Sorry for the confusion. I was trying to lay that out there for the people following this thread.

Anyway gaf, it's 1:00 am here in China, so I'm hitting the sack. Try not to get too carried away so i can catch up easily in the morning.

 

[Anaxagoras]

This kind of ties into my last point. When I say "there is no god", I'm assuming the normal, day-to-day definition that 90% (pulled out of ass, but likely!) of people in my society mean when they say the word "god". A conscious being with specific thoughts and emotions, who is invisible, can practice telepathy and has universe-creating superpowers, and possibly has special feelings for humanity. I have no problem saying "I know it doesn't exist". Could I be wrong? Sure. I could be wrong when it comes to the thousands of other deities and fictional beings I "know" doesn't exist as well. But I'll change my position when the overwhelming evidence against that type of god idea changes, lol. And of course, this doesn't literally mean I've somehow explored the entire universe to reach my conclusion.

If we're just talking about any vague and generic possible beginning to the universe, why even involve a loaded term like god? I think that just confuses things even more. I know that the whole "personal God" idea gets looked at as some sort of strawman, but that's how the vast majority of people have viewed God over the years.

Good points. In reality people disagree on what is considered evidence, what is sufficient enough to prove or disprove something.

Some claim with certainty that the God of the Bible doesn't exists because it contradicts itself by definition, that to them is enough to dismiss him.
Kind of like proving that earth is not flat by proving that it is round, something can not be both 3 dimensional and 2 dimensional at the same time so the claim it is flat is thus dismissed.

The personal God can be also tested scientifically, if God interveins in our day to day lives through answering prayers and performing miracles then it can be observed and tested.
However the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, this means that just because no difference has been found between the controlled groups doesn't mean that he doesn't exists. If anything at all it will only make it less probable to be true.

The last one is the non personal god, the creator, cosmic force, spirit, that one is the hardest to denounce since we don't know anything about it.

 

[Zero Tolerance]

Arguably that's what the various religions are.

Arguably? I'd strongly advise against having a conversation with anyone who confuses "cult" with "religion," let alone an argument.

...unless you find migraines orgasmic.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Nope. because then that's not the god I believe in.

I will decline and walk away?

but the question you're asking for is

would I give up what I believe in?

no, I believe God is there for our happiness, if i kill my child. I doubt I will be the same.

God works in mysterious ways my friend.

Ok, I have nothing else to ask, you passed the test.

 

[agrajag]

I have a hardon for atheists.

 

[krioto]

there is no god, there is no higher purpose, and when you die, you're dead.

just try to have a good time while you're here.

 

[Mael]

there is no god, there is no higher purpose, and when you die, you're dead.

just try to have a good time while you're here.

So basically ...

avatar quote fail!

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

Arguably? I'd strongly advise against having a conversation with anyone who confuses "cult" with "religion," let alone an argument.

...unless you find migraines orgasmic.

They're just very old cults with huge numbers of believers. At least that's how it appears to me.

 

[LCGeek]

Arguably? I'd strongly advise against having a conversation with anyone who confuses "cult" with "religion," let alone an argument.

...unless you find migraines orgasmic.

I only separate a cult and religion by the money one gets and the size of those it influences or aims to control. There is no real argument because despite similarities religion enjoys benefits from it status while cult is typically used from a negative or demonized view despite largely practicing the same behaviors viewing the hierarchy of either. You last point is definitely one to remember someone starting such an argument is a philosophical masochist or sadist depending on how one sees it.

 

[Mael]

They're just very old cults with huge numbers of believers. At least that's how it appears to me.

actually no, I thought I had an idea but....no

 

[Anaxagoras]

I have a hardon for atheists.

 

[blazinglord]

I would characterise myself as a 'protestant agnostic'. I'm enormously sympathetic to Protestantism (and very critical of Catholicism), but I don't actually live by day to day life by religion. My respect for Protestantism mostly stems from its history and its pragmatism. I accept the hypothesis that religion has helped mankind to get its present state. Protestantism probably did more than other any other religion in that respect. England being freed of the shackles of Rome during the reformation was certainly the best path England could have ever taken.

That's not to say that Protestantism today is without its faults. My main two criticism of Protestantism are, the current leadership in the Anglican community are too intent and focused on keeping united worldwide at the expense of the Protestant principles. Which is wrong. The CofE in this respect is spineless and frustrating. I wish those sympathetic to Catholicism currently in the Anglican community (and are unfortunately dominating it) would split and go back to Rome if prefer Catholicism so much. My second worry is the warped version of Protestantism that is so influential in the US. I get that Protestantism in the states has always been somewhat more conventional and less pragmatic. But honestly, I don't blame American atheists hating Protestantism when they're acting like Catholics in Protestant clothing unable to look in any other direction other than backwards. It becomes quite hard to defend Protestantism when your champions are Sarah Palin and Pat Robertson with their inability to separate religion with politics despite it being enshrined in the American constitution.

 

[Dever]

They're just very old cults with huge numbers of believers. At least that's how it appears to me.

I don't think they should be considered cults unless they pretty much attempt to control every single aspect of their members' lives, make them completely dependent on the cult and discourage interacting with people who don't belong to the cult by demonizing them. I think scientology does pretty much all of those things(What are your crimes?? )... Some forms of christianity are definitely cults, like the Westboro Baptists.

 

[-x.Red.x-]

God works in mysterious ways my friend.

Ok, I have nothing else to ask, you passed the test.

I feel awesome for some reason.

but if there are some other people who want to question my faith, by all means please come forward.

I want to stand my ground with my beliefs. GAF seems like the ideal place to do this.

:lol

 

[Kinitari]

Question for atheist GAF:
Assuming there is only two places in the after life, heaven and hell. If God wants to throw you in hell in the afterlife, would you except it? What would be your excuse if you want to go to heaven? What would be your reaction, or you would prefer to leave it until then and not think about it right now?

First answering your question:

If I was wrong about there being an afterlife/God - I wouldn't really be expecting being tossed into hell would I? I would be surprised first and foremost. If I was wrong, I would much rather go to Heaven, of course - for an 'excuse' into getting into heaven? "I've been a better Muslim (I use Muslim because I know you're Muslim, and I was raised Muslim too) than most people who call themselves Muslim, lemme in." What would my reaction be if I got tossed into hell? I think eternal anguish is most likely to be my reaction.

Now lemme turn this around on you:

Lets say, me as an Islamic Apostate, am an absolutely amazing person in my life. I save childrens lives on the Daily, I found the cure to HIV, I don't dring or do drugs and I am faithful to my wife.

On the flip side, there is a drug addict murdering adulturer, who beats his wife and kids, who right before his death repents and converts to Islam and with his dying breath recites a sura.

Who has a better chance at getting into heaven?

 

[Dever]

This also pisses me off, I hate this so much you don't understand.

The only thing I can say is
destiny

Let's say those people lived and done something worst for everyone.

Considering people like Hitler, I don't think God is in the business of smiting people before they get the chance to fuck shit up.

or
by having those people not die, certain family members wouldn't have a "revelation"
either turning atheist or what-ever. (that's contradiction but what can I say)

While suffering can lead people to find religion, sure, the opposite is also true. Many people since freaking Epicurus have lost their faith because of the amount of seemingly unnecessary suffering in the world.

 

[Anaxagoras]

I feel awesome for some reason.

but if there are some other people who want to question my faith, by all means please come forward.

I want to stand my ground with my beliefs. GAF seems like the ideal place to do this.

:lol

And a challenger appears

I usually don't ask, I usually answer, correct and get corrected.
I mean there isn't much to ask really besides what convinces you and what if you are wrong and this goes to atheists too.
You find the evidence sufficient or take it on faith and we don't consider it evidence of what it is claimed to prove.

Anyway, I will hang around till a get a better position to tackle you from when you are not as focused, till then have fun.

 

["God's Beard!"]

Taoism is pretty chill.

 

[sasimirobot]

1 hand working is better than 2 hands praying

 

[soul creator]

as just another general point, I think one reason for the confusion that generally arises is because two different things end up being discussed:

1) whether the claims made by various religions are actually true or not
2) whether the social/cultural/psychological effect of a religion is worthwhile or not

These are two wildly different topics, but they often get mashed up into a single discussion. As you might expect, nonbelievers tend to focus on 1), while believers tend to focus on 2).

When a believer focuses on 1)...it usually looks kind of bad. Because really, defending various religious claims by definition requires one to stretch the boundaries of reason (or ignore it entirely). If the claims made by a lot of religions were easily observed, mundane things, they wouldn't really be religious or have much appeal, would they? Christianity isn't interesting simply because Jesus said some nice, positive things. Christianity is interesting because Jesus said some nice things, and he's the son of god granting eternal salvation. You get rid of the latter, and Christianity just becomes another "cool story bro", rather than a religion with worshipers numbering in the billions.

The more interesting discussion I think is 2) because you're then dealing with sociology/psychology/anthropology/etc. and you start to question its actual effect of human behavior. Personally, I think on balance it's currently a negative effect, since the supposed "good" things nowadays that come from religions are usually secular things with religious language confusingly layered on top of them. Obviously other folks may disagree. But the main point is, I think that's a more important topic to discuss.

I tend to think the whole "are many religious claims true or not/does god exist" questions have been answered long ago, but the only reason they persist is because people think you have to hold to some of 1) to get the results of 2).

 

[Anaxagoras]

Lets say, me as an Islamic Apostate, am an absolutely amazing person in my life. I save childrens lives on the Daily, I found the cure to HIV, I don't dring or do drugs and I am faithful to my wife.

On the flip side, there is a drug addict murdering adulturer, who beats his wife and kids, who right before his death repents and converts to Islam and with his dying breath recites a sura.

Who has a better chance at getting into heaven?

According to one story, Muhammad is said to have informed a prostitute who had seen a thirsty dog hanging about a well and given it water to drink. Allah forgave her because of that good deed.

An example as to how Muslims are punished for mistreating cats can be found in the Hadith (oral traditions telling the story of the Prophet Mohammed and which have been recorded in writing). When a woman kept a cat locked up and failed to feed the cat until the cat died, the woman was tortured and "put to Hell".

We might get a chance too. After all he is the boss and he gets to decide everything, just act cool and you will be fine.

 

[Kinitari]

According to one story, Muhammad is said to have informed a prostitute who had seen a thirsty dog hanging about a well and given it water to drink. Allah forgave her because of that good deed.

An example as to how Muslims are punished for mistreating cats can be found in the Hadith (oral traditions telling the story of the Prophet Mohammed and which have been recorded in writing). When a woman kept a cat locked up and failed to feed the cat until the cat died, the woman was tortured and "put to Hell".

We might get a chance too. After all he is the boss and he gets to decide everything, just act cool and you will be fine.

I've never heard this viewpoint, especially from the Islamic side of things. Usually I hear that non-believers go to hell, because everyone has a chance to convert to Islam, and by not doing so you are comitting a most heinous sin. Also, as an Apostate, I am pretty much hellbound, regardless of what I do. Still, nice to hear some people think that the actual character of the person matters more than some lip service.

But that leads to the question, why be religious at all? Why not live your life as a good person, and leave it at that? If people believed that they could not go through all the religious red tape, and still go to heaven, how many people would still bother with the formalities?

 

[Anaxagoras]

I've never heard this viewpoint, especially from the Islamic side of things. Usually I hear that non-believers go to hell, because everyone has a chance to convert to Islam, and by not doing so you are comitting a most heinous sin. Also, as an Apostate, I am pretty much hellbound, regardless of what I do. Still, nice to hear some people think that the actual character of the person matters more than some lip service.

Yeah but thats me cherry picking, let me show you some more:

The Prophet s.a.w said, the dividing line between a believer and a disbeliever is the negligence of prayer." Muslim

umm another one : "That which spearates a believer from infidelity is simply the salah". "He has no share in Islam who does not offer Salah".

"Two (kinds of) eyes will not be touched by the Fire: an eye that wept out of fear of Allah and an eye that spent the night guarding in the cause of Allah." (At-Tirmidhi)

muhammad prophesised that islam would split into 73 sects BUT ONLY ONE would go to heaven

Their ranking/reward system is just bugged, infinity ward would have done a much better job at this.
Wait till you hear about getting houses and inviting/leveling up friends and family members to your level/heaven no. if you are shaheed.

But that leads to the question, why be religious at all? Why not live your life as a good person, and leave it at that? If people believed that they could not go through all the religious red tape, and still go to heaven, how many people would still bother with the formalities?

If you are going to go to heaven just for being a good person, how would this in anyway help anyone who wants to start a religion?

 

[TheRagnCajun]

Arguably? I'd strongly advise against having a conversation with anyone who confuses "cult" with "religion," let alone an argument.

...unless you find migraines orgasmic.

Bascially all mainstream religions started out as cults. However, now we call them religiosn because they have stood the test of time and become widely adopted and ingrained our culture. Today 'cult' has a stigma that doesn't necessarily apply in all contexts. It doesn't necessarily mean its exploitive. Try to think of a 'cult' as any new religious movement, and leave the deffinition as broad as that.

 

[Mr.Squirrel]

I'll give everyone my personal religious history and just throw it out there.

I grew up not really having a religious background. When I was 9 I went to church in NC (was staying with family) and was the first time I remember hearing about Jesus, Holy Spirit, being saved, and all that jazz. I remember (around 9 again) asking Jesus to save me one night and I guess that's when I became a Christian.

Fast forward to when I'm 13 or 14, I didn't really do shit as a "saved" person. When I was in high school I decided to take my faith seriously and become the jesus freak of my neighborhood. I'd read the bible, study bible history, pray, fast, and even wanted to be a missionary to help save souls for christ.

Around 17 or 18 I realized that being a Christian really wasn't for me, so I said fuck it I'm gonna live my life for me instead of what the church/bible says and start thinking for myself. As I began to become more honest with myself I had to admit 1) I honestly DON'T know that God exists. 2) I honestly DON'T know that Jesus is the way to heaven. and 3) I probably will NEVER know the answers to this question.

Now I'm a 27 yo happy agnostic who's trying to make the most out of this life because I'm honestly not expecting shit else after I'm gone from earth.

Now my only religious struggle is in coming to terms with being a theistic agnostic, or an atheistic agnostic. As I get older and become more honest with myself, I'm realizing that I'm more atheistic agnostic meaning there's a possibility god may exist, but I don't really think it does.

The best thing about my religious experience though was looking back, I understand why people can't stand religious folks LMAO. I was an annoying, smug, holier than thou asshole man. It was disgusting lol. That taught me to just accept everyone for who they are now. Gays, atheists, wicans, homeless, even republicans. Now I appreciate the diversity of people's belief systems and try to learn more about it so I can appreciate it. It also annoys me more now when people DON'T accept people for who they are and cast judgment. I still fucking hate cats though, they're the epitome of evil.

 

[Zero Tolerance]

Bascially all mainstream religions started out as cults. However, now we call them religiosn because they have stood the test of time and become widely adopted and ingrained our culture. Today 'cult' has a stigma that doesn't necessarily apply in all contexts. It doesn't necessarily mean its exploitive. Try to think of a 'cult' as any new religious movement, and leave the deffinition as broad as that.

And those distinctions are critical if one wishes to enter a serious discussion on either topic. To imply that religion, wholesale, is "sinister" as the common understanding of "cult" suggests would be more than slightly myopic.

 

[uraldix]

Bascially all mainstream religions started out as cults. However, now we call them religiosn because they have stood the test of time and become widely adopted and ingrained our culture. Today 'cult' has a stigma that doesn't necessarily apply in all contexts. It doesn't necessarily mean its exploitive. Try to think of a 'cult' as any new religious movement, and leave the deffinition as broad as that.

one definition of cult:
a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

and the widely accepted definition:
a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.