Even the concept "atheist" is annoying

[Anatta]

My post come from some rather somber combat times when I so soldiers -atheists or not- pleading with G-d not to let them die....

...I do not remember where I heard, I think it was in a song, the saying that goes like this: "Nobody know until the day they die" that is where I derive the: "life is funny until you die"

Of course they does not apply to the faithful, to folks who believe in G-d...

BTW I do not understand why you found my post IS so offensive...it was just a "testimony"

BTW I have the feeling that your campaign to denied the existence of G-d and to indoctrinate you disfelif in others is possible because your soul has been move by G-d and deep down you cannot help but feel the existence of G-d even if it in the form of a hate for G-d....just my musings

For The Other Readers (Atheist-Agnostic-Theist)...This Is Not A Thread Overthrowing/Take Over...It's Just My Personal Take On Things And Just Something For My Friend Peky To Ponder(We Often Have These 'Friendly' Discussions-That Tend To Go Nowhere) I Take Full Responsibility For Any Derailing And Will Pay For Any Inconvenience Caused...Do You Accept Virtual  Cyber Cheques ? 



Kia Ora Peky,

I don't find a belief in a god or many gods offensive, a little outdated perhaps, but not offensive...
However the only time I get a little concerned is when a person uses their belief in a god to justify discrimination against others and in many cases the 'others' being the poor trans-theists who have been indoctrinated with the concept of 'sin'( what the ancient Greeks called "Missing the Mark" )...

You seem to take some comfort in the ancient Hebrew mystical Kabbalic concept of a god and you may not 'believe' this but I'm truly happy for you. especially considering the struggle many of us have to go through, in order to become 'who we are' you had that 'safety net'...

However you still seem to struggle somewhat when you feel that your belief is challenged, hence your need to post in the atheist and or Buddhist forum,(who knows....perhaps 'subconsciously' it's to do with your military background where a pre-emptive strike could possibly win the day)

And finally Peky, no I don't 'hate' your god or anybody's gods...The belief in a god is just how ones mind has been "conditioned"... At first the seed was planted(in fertile ground) nurtured, then it took root and finally it becomes 'self' generating...(the self consisting of the psycho-physical phenomena of 'form=the body' 'consciousness' 'sensation' 'perception' 'mental formation' ( habitual mental activities)...All of which are in a 'constant state of flux...

No consistent abiding self exists, or what is commonly known in the "non theistic" Buddhist circles as  "Non Self" or No Soul...Anatta=soul lessness...But then you know all this Peky because we have been through this before...

I wish you well Peky(even if you do find this hard to 'believe')

The End Of The Derailing 

Metta Zenda    

PS For other readers.... I might just add...Sam Harris would agree regarding the non theist Buddhist concept of/on "Non Self" and how do I know this ? Because he had spent many years studying Buddhist and other types of Eastern meditation, and has a very good understanding of the type of "mind science" that's involved... He disregards most of the 'spiritual' aspects/trapping of Buddhism, but the meditation aspects he took to like a duck to water...

As an after thought....I don't expect other readers to 'believe' any of what I write especially when it comes to what the 'self' is...I take it those who have given it some 'thought' (studied it,  or meditated upon it) in the past have reached their own conclusions ( or perhaps it's inconclusive ) however I write from my personal 'experience' which for 'me' is a not 'belief' that can nor will 'change' in this life 'experience'...

[Tessa James]

However the only time I get a little concerned is when a person uses their belief in a god to justify discrimination against others and in many cases the 'others' being the poor trans-theists who have been indoctrinated with the concept of 'sin'( what the ancient Greeks called "Missing the Mark" )...  Metta Zenda

There are thousands of religious denominations and perhaps, billions of ideas about the supernatural, spiritual and concepts of god.  In consideration of the above quote;  I am happy to share ideas with those who can respect different perspectives about life.  Ethical considerations are an important part of living together on a small planet and religious or spiritual concepts provide a spring board, such as this thread, for discussion.  The rub comes when some take their beliefs to be "the truth" and brandish it with a righteous sword used to discriminate, promote intolerance, violence and war.  Our shared existence and history is replete with conflict based on religious intolerance.  Is someones ability to imagine something more valuable than the creative outlets of another?   The dust bin of history includes all kinds of deities and what was once codified dogma is now dog dodo;-)

I have known rational atheists in foxholes and consider myself a secular humanist.  While some draw lines to exclude others we can also draw a bigger circle that includes all of humanity.

Tessa James

[Chloe]

.  Is there an expression, a word for anyone who is totally unaware of the very concept of gods and religion? I just kind of resent the very notion of atheist in the first place.

Your an AGNOSTIC ?

An agnostic is a person who believes that the existence of a greater power, such as a god, cannot be proven or disproved; therefore an agnostic wallows in the complexity of the existence of higher beings.

Agnostics on religion (Christianity, Islam, Buddhists, etc): Religious zealots are often viewed as ignorant by agnostics' because of their blind following of a supreme being which may or may not exist.

Ever read "The Shack" ?

The Shack "is a metaphor for the places you get stuck, you get hurt, you get damaged...the thing where shame or hurt is centered

[Anatta]

Your an AGNOSTIC ?
Ever read "The Shack" ?

Kia Ora Kiera,

All the eggs in the same basket again 

"Agnostics on religion (Christianity, Islam, Buddhists, etc): Religious zealots are often viewed as ignorant by agnostics' because of their blind following of a supreme being which may or may not exist."

Perhaps this agnostic friend of yours, should read up a little on Buddhism...

Also Kiera, what the OP was on about was the a term or expression one could use which would describe a person who has ' no concept' (never had) of god or religion...I think you will find most members here are quite familiar with the term agnostic but I do see your point if one goes to the root of this Greek word

Word History: " An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a-, meaning "without, not," as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gnosis, "knowledge," which was used by early Christian writers to mean "higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things"; hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as "Gnostics" a group of his fellow intellectuals"ists," as he called them who had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a "man without a rag of a label to cover himself with," Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870. "

Metta Zenda

[Chloe]

Perhaps this agnostic friend of yours, should read up a little on Buddhism...
Metta Zenda

LOL No friend of mine, just an example use of the term!!

Here here try something a bit more 'weighty', in general . . .
it's not like this topic hasn't been covered before.

Can you make 'heads or tails' of this?

"For man's sense is falsely asserted" (by Progagoras' "Man is the measure of all things") "to be the standard of things: on the contrary, all the perceptions, both of the senses and the mind, bear reference to man and not to the universe; and the human mind resembles those uneven mirrors which impart their own properties to different objects . . . and distort and disfigure them" Novum Organum,i,41. . . . "the human understanding, from its peculiar nature, easily supposes a greater degree of order and regularity in things than it really finds . . . Hence the fiction" Ibid,i,45

. . . the human understanding, when any proposition has been once laid down (either from general admission and belief, or from the pleasure it affords), forces everything else to add fresh support and confirmation: and although most congent and abundant instances may exist to the contrary, yet either does not observe, or despises them, or it gets rid of and rejects them by some distinction, with violent and injurious prejudice, rather than sacrifice the authority of its first conclusion.

It was well answered by him who was shown in a temple the votive tablets suspended by such as had escaped the peril of shipwreck, and was pressed as to whether he would then recognize the power of the gods . . .[our 'innocent', godless person ->] 'But where are the portraits of those that have perished in spite of their vows?' All superstition is much the same, whether it be that of astrology, dreams, omens, retributive judgement, or the like, in all the deluded believers observe events which are fulfilled, but neglect and pass over their failure, though it be much more common" Ibid,i,46

"Having first determined the question according to his will, man then resorts to experience; and bending her into conformity with his placets, leads her about like a captive in a procession." Ibid,i.63

Valerius Terminus

Touche'!! In truth we all lay "exposed"!!

"man without a rag of a label to cover himself with,"

Perhaps our godless friend would be called "a noble savage" ??

Presumably, among these books is the Bible for, in similarly clear terms, Rousseau asserts that his task is to form a theory of what would have happened had man been left to his own devices, without divine intervention.

[Anatta]

Kia Ora Kiera,

That's quite interesting...

I haven't studied Greek philosophy in detail, ( in other words I'm a real dumbass when it come to philosophy in general) but it would seem Progagoras was active around the same time as the historical Buddha "Gotama Sidaharta" give or take a few hundred years (what's a few hundred years between friends) 

"For man's sense is falsely asserted" (by Progagoras' "Man is the measure of all things") "to be the standard of things: on the contrary, all the perceptions, both of the senses and the mind, bear reference to man and not to the universe; and the human mind resembles those uneven mirrors which impart their own properties to different objects . . . and distort and disfigure them" Novum Organum,i,41. . . . "the human understanding, from its peculiar nature, easily supposes a greater degree of order and regularity in things than it really finds .

"the human understanding, when any proposition has been once laid down (either from general admission and belief, or from the pleasure it affords), forces everything else to add fresh support and confirmation: and although most congent and abundant instances may exist to the contrary, yet either does not observe, or despises them, or it gets rid of and rejects them by some distinction, with violent and injurious prejudice, rather than sacrifice the authority of its first conclusion.

It was well answered by him who was shown in a temple the votive tablets suspended by such as had escaped the peril of shipwreck, and was pressed as to whether he would then recognize the power of the gods . . . 'But where are the portraits of those that have perished in spite of their vows?' All superstition is much the same, whether it be that of astrology, dreams, omens, retributive judgement, or the like, in all the deluded believers observe events which are fulfilled, but neglect and pass over their failure, though it be much more common"

I agree with much of what is described ( However Buddhism teaches Non-duality there is no separation  of mind and universe plus the mind 'is' the sixth sense according to my understanding of Buddhist teachings)....

However in the long run...We are but bundles of fluctuating energy...( Or is that flatuating energy) 

I have to get ready for work...must fly....

Metta Zenda

[Chloe]

However in the long run...We are but bundles of fluctuating energy...( Or is that flatuating energy) 

Kuan Yin, actually I agree with you that Budda was closer to the TRUTH !! The above quote is from Sir Francis Bacon, born "York House, London. January 22, 1561", came much much LATER and, to my mind, who's thinking precursors Einstein's theories on relativity insofar as "the observed cannot be divorced from the observer".

Western 'dualism' served it's own scientific purposes but have you ever read "Tao of Physics" by modern physicist Fritjof Capra??

The purpose of this book (the Tao of Physics) is to explore the relationship between the concepts of modern physics and the basic ideas in the philosophical and religious traditions of the Far East. We shall see how the two foundations of twentieth-century physics - quantum theory and relativity - both force us to see the world very much in the way a Hindu, Buddhist or Taoist sees it .. (Fritjof Capra, Tao of Physics, 1975)

One of my FAV books 

My passion for as long as I remember was the sciences, and still is...

Modern science, on an increasingly complex empirical level, is revealing to us what the ancients have INTUITIVELY known all along !!! "Truth" has come full circle! 

LOL Now, I can give ya my theories on "Hydrogen is God" but that's 'anuther story . . .

[Ltl89]

Free Will by Sam Harris, is a very short book (about 50 pages. Honestly!) with a coherent flow of argument. To be honest, it's quite a while since I read it.  My paraphrasing would be a combination of Chinese whispers, false memory syndrome and old age. Please don't let your understandable reservations regarding Sam Harris put you off this book however. It is very much a stand alone product. In summary though he challenges every aspect of what you may consider having control over any and every aspect of who you are and how it should change our attitude to psychopaths for existence: there should be no condemnation just control so that they don't harm others.......dodgy paraphrasing setting in already. I'll stop.

I might give it a read.  Though I really am skepitcal about the validity of anything coming from Harris.  He doesn't seem to be an authority in this area and I find a lot of what he has said in the past very questionable.  He's the kind that often passes opinion as fact which concerns me.  However, I'll take your word that this is a good book.  I'll try to check it out.  I've recently purchased "Who's in Charge?" by Michael Gazzaniga which is a book on this same topic written by a Neuroscientist.  I think I'll start with this one before I move on to Harris.

[Anatta]

Kia Ora L, and others,

Spoiler alert re  "Who's in Charge?" by Michael Gazzaniga

The following link is a review of the book (in my case read one neuroscience book read them all, but I still find them interesting)


http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/pImDIDFCkGPpZtUnSDdA/full#.UcfEYfmky5U

Quote from a Zen practitioner ( I think he too was a neuroscientist-I can't remember the book nor the name of its author just this quote)

"One is simply one's experience -Ones ego is the abstraction from these experiences-Ones ego should be viewed as a convenient analytic device !"

I think Michael Gazzaniga mentions something similar to this (according to the review)...

Neuroscientists show a lot of interest in Eastern meditation techniques  and some of the top scientist belong/contribute to the Mind & Life institute set up by the Dalai lama and some US scientists...

http://www.mindandlife.org/



Metta Zenda

[Jenna Stannis]

Is there an expression, a word for anyone who is totally unaware of the very concept of gods and religion?

Godless?

[NovaSaber]

Most religions would claim the lack of knowledge stems from the individual not God making some incapable in believing.  Maybe, I'm wrong in that.  Are there religions or denominations that teach that people are born without the ability to have faith?  I've never encountered that before, but I could be wrong as there are so many different religious beliefs.

"Predestination", as the word is used in Calvinism, means something like that; John Calvin believed that God decides whether or not a person is going to be "saved" before they are even born, which means he intentionally creates people that he is certain are going to be condemned.

[Jenna Stannis]

I might give it a read.  Though I really am skepitcal about the validity of anything coming from Harris.  He doesn't seem to be an authority in this area...

If a BA in philosophy, a PhD in neuroscience and research into the neural basis of belief, disbelief and uncertainty doesn't make one qualified to speak on free-will and determinism, I'm not sure what would.

V. S. Ramachandran is another neuroscientist whose views seem to align with Harris' ideas on free-will. Read these two authors along with Daniel Dennett and I think you're left with some very sound reasoning regarding consciousness and determinism.

[Tessa James]

One answer to the OPs query is "Free thinker."

I was originally indoctrinated into catholicism but have met many people who were "raised" or socialized without any proscriptive belief in a god.  Having thrown off the shackles of religion decades ago I find it is easy to be free of those tedious questions about how many angels fit on the head of a pin.  It feels liberating not to worry about theistic designs and other superstitious nonsense.  There are tangible problems and solutions that need our attention without recourse to the unseen, unprovable and unlikely. 

Being free to explore new ideas and ask questions without domination by ancient concepts is free thinking.

[amZo]

I'm agnostic.

I find being either atheist or religious simply too sure of an unsure thing.

I believe there could be a creator, but have no idea who she is or why she did it.

[Anatta]

I'm agnostic.

I find being either atheist or religious simply too sure of an unsure thing.

I believe there could be a creator, but have no idea who she is or why she did it.

Kia Ora Nikko,

So this would make you a theist leaning agnostic....as opposed to an atheist leaning agnostic ?

Metta Zenda

[suzifrommd]

I'm agnostic.

I find being either atheist or religious simply too sure of an unsure thing.

Does belief require certainty?

For example, I believe transgender originates before birth. Am I certain? No. Further evidence might change my mind, but based on what I know, for now I think that's most likely.

So can I still be an atheist if I'm not 100% sure the universe is totally natural, but I think that's the most likely explanation based on what evidence I've seen?

[peky]

The rub comes when some take their beliefs to be "the truth" and brandish it with a righteous sword used to discriminate, promote intolerance, violence and war.  Our shared existence and history is replete with conflict based on religious intolerance.  Is someone's ability to imagine something more valuable than the creative outlets of another?   

Actuallty most wars were as always about resources, religion was some times used an excuse

The dust bin of history includes all kinds of deities and what was once codified dogma is now dog dodo;-)

^^^ a rather offensive and arrogant statement considering there are still people who believe in those deities (e,g, Zeus)

Tessa James

[amZo]

Kia Ora Nikko,

So this would make you a theist leaning agnostic....as opposed to an atheist leaning agnostic ?

Metta Zenda

I tend to believe something designed and created all this 'stuff'... 

Does belief require certainty?

For example, I believe transgender originates before birth. Am I certain? No. Further evidence might change my mind, but based on what I know, for now I think that's most likely.

So can I still be an atheist if I'm not 100% sure the universe is totally natural, but I think that's the most likely explanation based on what evidence I've seen?

No, I don't think so. But I tend not to belief in it with absolute certainty if it's not proven, I leave open the possibility that my beliefs could ultimately be proven false. Therefore, I'm not much of a "just have faith" type of person.

I can't believe in something because I want it to be true, I think a lot of people do. I think this can lead to bad things. For one, you can get stubbornly stuck on failed harmful ideas.

[Tessa James]

Of course it would not be arrogant and offensive to think an imaginary being wants some people to subject the other people of earth and her creatures to it's will as understood by the adherents.  If we understand religion within a social and political context it becomes clearly another power struggle.  I rather like being free of it all.

[peky]

Of course it would not be arrogant and offensive to think an imaginary being wants some people to subject the other people of earth and her creatures to it's will as understood by the adherents.  If we understand religion within a social and political context it becomes clearly another power struggle.  I rather like being free of it all.

Of course you have the right to denounce and condemn those religious extremist who literally accept and/or interpret their religious texts/dogmas to impose their twisted morality and ethics on others. You can find such a despicable behavior by individuals from all religions -even the peace and loving Buddhists have been known to murder their opponents in a fit of "rightful indignation"-

What I object is the insulting of any deity or religious  beliefs...lets put the onus where the onus is due with man not with G-d