May 20 is ‘Everybody Draw Mohammed Day’

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:24

Tefal said:
....

But they can define a the true definition of a word like atheism which is a concept and has existed for hundreds of years with that exact meaning.

It is not a trait it is a cold hard concept and definition.

Ok, so what is your definition of a theist? The same as the dictionary definition?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theism

belief in the existence of a god or gods; specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world

So by that definition, what do you call Buddhists or Taoists who follow a religion that does not specifically believe in any 'God'?

My definition would be a person who believes in supernatural myth, not in 'God'. It is entirely posible to be a theist, but not believe in 'God', if you believe in some other alternate theory to how live was created seperate to god, but believe in this as a religion and follow it as a faith.

I would seriously state that the dictionary and western definitions on theism and atheism are 100% incorrect, and unfortunately due to having been taught these definitions for such a long time, people believe in fallacy as truth.

Tefal · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:27

bhavv said:
Ok, so what is your definition of a theist? The same as the dictionary definition?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theism

So by that definition, what do you call Buddhists or Taoists who follow a religion that does not specically believe in any 'God'?

My definition would be a person who believes in supernatural myth, not in 'God'. It is entirely posible to be a theist, but not believe in 'God', if you believe in some other alternate theory to how live was created seperate to god, but believe in this as a religion.

That Buddhism and Taoism are not theistic religions?

much like Christians are monotheistic and ancient Greeks where polytheistic.

hurfdurf · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:28

All the religious idiots in this thread should probably watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

Then feel really stupid.

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:30

Tefal said:
That Buddhism and Taoism are not theistic religions?

much like Christians are monotheistic and ancient Greeks where polytheistic.

So are buddhists and taoists Atheists as well then because they dont believe in the mono or polytheistic Gods?

I strongly disagree.

I've already shown you that dictionaries make mistakes, they generalize and write what is a broadly and commonly accepted definition about things that the majority 'believe'.

Atheism and Theism are physiological functions, they are descriptions of how each persons brain thinks and feels, and the current commonly accepted definitions of them in dictionaries are completely wrong.

Tefal · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:34

bhavv said:
So are buddhists and taoists Atheists as well then because they dont believe in the mono or polytheistic Gods?

Do they believe there is no god or simply that hey do not know?

Do their teachings explicitly say there is no god one does not exist?

because my bet is that most Buddhists would come under ignostics.

Having not read their religious texts you'd have to ask them suppose.

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:38

Tefal said:
Do they believe there is no god or simply that hey do not know?

Do their teachings explicitly say there is no god one does not exist?

because my bet is that most Buddhists would come under ignostics.

Having not read their religious texts you'd have to ask them suppose.

Read this:

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma3/budgod.html

Budha could be considered an atheist only because the concept of Monotheism was not one which he had ever encountered, and he stopped praying to the Indian gods because none of them could end the suffering of one human being.

Now, if you actually go into East Asian countries, their belief of theism and religion is entirely different to our beliefs in the west based mainly on mono and polytheism. There are many religions that people follow and believe in with mythical beliefs such as karma and reincarnation, yet they do not hold the idea that creationism or life was formed by a creator such as God, but believe in other similar philosophies that say the same things, but without the idea of any Gods.

I really doubt that these people would call themselves Atheist, and I doubt that Atheists could ever believe in similar philosophies unless proven true.

Tefal · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:39

did he explicitly say they did not exist though?

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:44

Did the Buddha believe in God, the One God of the desert, the God of the Christians, Jews and Muslims?

Well... No... He didn't... Monotheism (only one God) was a foreign concept to the Buddha, his world was filled with many gods. The creator god Brahma being the most important one.

At the time of the Buddha, the only people practicing the religion of the One God of the desert, were the Jews. Remember, it was still 500 years before Christ came into the world.

The Buddha never left India. The Buddha walked from village to village... In his entire lifetime he never went any further than 200 miles from his birthplace.

The Buddha never met a Jew... And because of this, he never said anything about the One God of the desert.

There is also nothing in the teachings of the Buddha that suggest how to find God or worship the god's of India, although the Buddha himself was a theist (believed in gods), his teachings are non-theistic.

I as an Atheist, cant 'belief' that Atheism and believing in Budhism can both be defined by the same thing - 'Lack of belief in God', when Atheists actually do not believe in Budhism or any other philosophy or supernatural mythology either. Budhism is still a faith based religion that Atheists cannot believe in, even though it has nothing to do with God.

God is not the only belief that defines Theism and Atheism. The correct acceptable definitions in my opinion are a 'Belief' or 'Lack of belief' in superstition and mythology.

Tefal · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:51

Atheists actually do not believe in Budhism or any other philosophy

errr..you might wanna check that agin mate.

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 17:54

Tefal said:
errr..you might wanna check that agin mate.

They dont. Pure atheism is a rejection of any unproven belief system, whether it is based on God or not. Most atheists can only believe in things which have been proven and supported using the scientific method, such as myself, which we consider to be the only accurate way of determining whether something is actually real or not. If a belief cannot even form a testable hypothesis and theory, then it is immediately disregarded and seen as being false.

Rejection of unproven beliefs is not a belief itself.

I definately 'can not Believe' in anything supernatural. This doesnt mean that I believe that these things arent real, just as much I dont 'believe' that the powerpuff girls arent real, this is just a function that exists in my way of thinking that things cannot exist on the basis of having no valid, testable proof.

FoxEye · 4 Jun 2010 at 18:00

hurfdurf said:
All the religious idiots in this thread should probably watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

Then feel really stupid.

So many atheists honestly believe that religious people believe for the sake of believing, or that it's a choice they have made based upon nothing at all.

The idea that our belief in God is so weak/unfounded that a simple youtube video would convert us to atheism does raise a smile, but is based on a bad assumption.

Tefal · 4 Jun 2010 at 18:20

bhavv said:
They dont. Pure atheism is a rejection of any unproven belief system, whether it is based on God or not. Most atheists can only believe in things which have been proven and supported using the scientific method, such as myself, which we consider to be the only accurate way of determining whether something is actually real or not. If a belief cannot even form a testable hypothesis and theory, then it is immediately disregarded and seen as being false.

Rejection of unproven beliefs is not a belief itself.

I definately 'can not Believe' in anything supernatural. This doesnt mean that I believe that these things arent real, just as much I dont 'believe' that the powerpuff girls arent real, this is just a function that exists in my way of thinking that things cannot exist on the basis of having no valid, testable proof.

you might want to look up what philosophy means....

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 18:27

Tefal said:
you might want to look up what philosophy means....

A belief system, which you will find that Atheists also dont believe in, and Atheism itself is not.

All babies are born Atheist, that is that no one is born with the idea of God, but this is usually taught to just about everyone as they grow up.

This doesnt mean that babies believe that god does not exist, as they do not have the function to believe that either, they simply lack the idea and hence the belief in any God or religion.

Tefal · 4 Jun 2010 at 18:31

bhavv said:
A belief system,

No it isn't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

Atheists are quite prominent in philosophical history.

It the bedrock science is built on.

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 18:51

So now you use wikipedia for you definition, but the article on there about Atheism isnt good enough for you because the Miriam and Oxford dictionaries say otherwise?

Philosophy is an obsolete theoretic method of discussing beliefs. Many scientists and atheists today consider the scientific method to have obsoleted the use of Philosophy.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/philosophy

4 a : the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group b : calmness of temper and judgment befitting a philosopher

My view is very simple - if an idea cannot be supported using the scientific method, then it obviously is not real. And god can be tested scientifically, and disproven:

Tefal · 4 Jun 2010 at 18:54

bhavv said:
Many scientists and atheists today consider the scientific method to have obsoleted the use of Philosophy.

Who are these many?

Can you list a few prominent scientists who believe philosophy ios obsolete?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/philosophy

4 a : the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group b : calmness of temper and judgment befitting a philosopher

Yes, a "groups philosophy" is different to "philosophy" as it's more of an adaption of the word.

NeilF · 4 Jun 2010 at 18:58

Spawn said:
Dont know about that ie people being born gay in all honesty....saying that im not too clued up on what makes a person homosexual or not.

But is someone clued up enough to quote their religions view on them? Hell fodder or not?

RDM · 4 Jun 2010 at 19:00

bhavv said:
Philosophy is an obsolete theoretic method of discussing beliefs. Many scientists and atheists today consider the scientific method to have obsoleted the use of Philosophy.

Really? I am suprised. What about when your subject has nothing whatsoever to do with predicting results?

NeilF · 4 Jun 2010 at 19:00

FoxEye said:
The idea that our belief in God is so weak/unfounded that a simple youtube video would convert us to atheism does raise a smile, but is based on a bad assumption.

No, I think we're clued up enough to realise you've already missed the obvious, and nothing can shake you back into reality...

It's taken quite literally nothing to convince you in a God, so using these heady heights of reasoning, I suspect nothing can make you think otherwise.

bhavv · 4 Jun 2010 at 19:13

RDM said:
Really? I am suprised. What about when your subject has nothing whatsoever to do with predicting results?

Explain that again? The scientific method takes new ideas and attempts to form them into testable hypothesis and methods to obtain definate results. Results can be predicted based on solid theory, but until they are properly obtained by the method and analysed, no conclusion is yet made to the confirmation of whether that thoery is correct or false.

Philosophy is a bunch of nuts discussing personal ideas and beliefs under the hugely flawed thinking of the Human Brain, wondering whether gold can be made from lead, whether trees that fall make any sound, whether things that have no physical chance of being existent may somehow be just because of some random cack theory that someones brain conjures up.

Philosophy has been around for thousands of years and has never come close to matching the progress that the scientific method has made. The emphasis on the scientific method is seeking the truth, whereas the emphasis in religion and philosophy are simply believing whatever you want to, and making up completely illogical and irrational reasons to support a false method of thinking.