I am an agnostic. I believe there are things spiritual and they come in many forms. However, religion should be a private belief system...limited to your internal sphere of influence. Don't tell me to take the name of God in crisis...I already do that...don't tell me to donate and volunteer in the name of God...I do it for my own conscience...Don't tell me that you are a religious organization taking care of poor kids...tell me you are a charitable institution and you believe in God...Dont tell me your God is better than mine and you will go to hell with your beliefs...tell me we can learn from each other
God is not a political manifesto...nor is he a vote bank. The only way I see to separate Church and State...prevent other religious belief systems from being trampled...and bring equality to all spiritual beliefs is the common denominator. Make its usage limited to personal purposes (like the tivo:))...why is it hard to understand that Atheists are balancing the system not imbalancing it.

Quite a logical response Stevendedalus! How else would anyone know they don't believe, and how else would those who do, know that they do believe and or not Atheist? Apparently one does not exist without the other. To everything there is an opposite, this is true!

It would be interesting to know if people start out believing. I personally think it's 'taught behavior', but since a baby can't speak I guess we'll never really know either way.
For me, the only reason (or context rather) to think about the existence of (a) god is in talking to people who believe in such a being. If I'd never met one of those, I doubt I would have called myself an atheist As I see it though, for a true believer his/her existence is defined by that belief and would probably shine through in a self-description of any kind.

In short, I'd have to agree with demosthenes locke in saying it's the theist that defines the atheist.

Close, however not upon existence of god does the atheist depend, but upon the existence of the theist.

Good logic, although some Atheist might disagree with you on this. How can there be one belief system without the other? How else would someone who doesn't believe in God knows he/she doesn't if it wasn't for someone proclaiming they did? So pretty logical to me.

However, religion should be a private belief system...limited to your internal sphere of influence.

And it is to many a very private belief system.

It would be interesting to know if people start out believing. I personally think it's 'taught behavior'

I have to agree that it is taught behavior. Each individual learned from someone what he/she believes, even if they came to that knowledge on their own, they learned it from somewhere/someone.

What is it about God that Atheists fear so much?

The fact that they may be wrong. man hates to be wrong, and the final judgement has no redirect. Christians (Jews, Muslims, etc) have no fear of being wrong. If they are wrong, they will never know it. Atheist will. They are sad and pathetic in a way. They pretend to believe when in fact their very fear indicates they really dont. And that is why they must fight the truth. To allow even a smidgen of doubt into their world is to admit they are wrong. And there is no counter argument.

They are to be pitied. They know only fear and superstition. Sad. Very Sad.

But they all do serve one God (at least I hope they do!) and this is what I meant when I said that they are all of the same faith. Christianity has so many divisions (and I mean this both literally and linguistically [or should that be in theory?]), the each group has their own way of doing things, most of them, if not all, have re-written the bible to suit their own teachings or concept of what they believe. But all this difference doesn't matter to God, as long as what they do follows the same path that leads to Him.

Here is where I might disagree (unless of course we're talking semantics, but I don't think we are). Depending on your view of Christianity, "God" can be very different from one opinion to the next. For example, the "God" of the pentecostal "name it, claim it" word of faith teachers is NOT my God, because my God cannot be manipulated based on my desires (for more money... health... etc). MY God is sovereign. Someone wrote to me once when my daughter was in need of healing and told me, "We have prayed and told God that we will accept nothing short of complete healing from this burn - with absolutely NO scarring." While I appreciate the sentiment and good wishes, the God that woman is praying to is not my God, because my God will do as HE sees fit. When He says "I'm working all things for your good", it doesn't necessarily mean my comfort, or what I think is good. He sees the big picture and I trust Him to operate in my best interests. Do you see the difference?

I have not re-written the Bible to suit my needs. That's one of the reasons I love being able to look up the original Greek and Hebrew... because it's more difficult to twist it to suit my own purposes when I go directly to the original (or as original as I am able) source. I want to see what it really says... not what Eugene Peterson THINKS it says. That said, I know that there are many denominations who have done just what you've pointed out.

As far as each of us following the path that leads to Him... I'd be betraying my "fundie" roots if I told you I accept any path to God other than through His Son. There are various ways that each of us is drawn to Him, granted, but ultimately, it is belief in Christ that opens the door for communion with God. There is no other way (John 14:6).

I don't know which Bible says that but we are told to spread the word of God. It is not however something that is duty bound although other Christians might feel differently about that.

Matthew 28:19-20... "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." In the Greek, the word for "make disciples" (matheteuo) is in the imperative mood, so it's a command. I'd say that makes it something that is duty bound.


Thanks for opening up discussion on these things, forverserenity. I enjoy hearing what others believe and think, and having a forum to discuss things rationally. This is great fun

Awed in Space: Most people do hate to be wrong, especially when they feel very strongly about something. But being wrong doesn't mean someone's an idiot, it's humbling and one hopefully learns from the mistake, so admitting it and moving on is always best.

Do you see the difference?

Yes I do. Some people's approach is different than others. How they approach (or see) their faith might be different from how you and I approach (or see) ours.

it is belief in Christ that opens the door for communion with God. There is no other way (John 14:6).

This is true. Some Christians though don't think this way is the only way.

Matthew 28:19-20... "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." In the Greek, the word for "make disciples" (matheteuo) is in the imperative mood, so it's a command. I'd say that makes it something that is duty bound.

This is something that a good Christian will do. Some do it and others don't. Everyone does it in his or her own way, although with some churches there is only their way and nothing else. And that's the wrong approach to take.

Thanks for opening up discussion on these things, forverserenity. I enjoy hearing what others believe and think, and having a forum to discuss things rationally. This is great fun

Thanks HC! I'm glad you found it interesting, I did too!

Close, however not upon existence of god does the atheist depend, but upon the existence of the theist. Both can exist in the complete absence of god.

Close, but it's really all about God, rather than theists. The prefix "a" in atheism means "without", so atheism means "without God (Theos)", not "without theists".

Your claim that “Both can exist in the complete absence of god” is really a subjective view. As is my view that without God’s existence, nothing could exist at all. (In the face of the Infinite, we cannot escape appeals to subjectivity and faith. But as I've been saying, it’s more a question of attuning our inner-intuition, which will eventually supersede faith.)