What exactly is atheism? (offshoot of same sex thread)

[Xue Sheng]

As I stated and it has yet to be challenged: we will all die eventually. At that time, any doubts or questions you had either way will definitely be laid to rest along with your body.

“W. C. Fields, a lifetime agnostic, was discovered reading a Bible on his deathbed. ''I'm looking for a loop-hole',' was his explaination.”

 

[oftheherd1]

...

As I stated and it has yet to be challenged: we will all die eventually. At that time, any doubts or questions you had either way will definitely be laid to rest along with your body.

Sorry, I thought is such a small part of your previous post, and for some reason thought you knew the below answer:

1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

So according to the Bible quote above, not all will die. Again, in the Bible, two persons did not see death.

You may or may not believe what is in the Bible. That is yours, or anyone elses choice.

 

[Tez3]

Sorry, I thought is such a small part of your previous post, and for some reason thought you knew the below answer:

1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

So according to the Bible quote above, not all will die. Again, in the Bible, two persons did not see death.

You may or may not believe what is in the Bible. That is yours, or anyone elses choice.

Are we going to have the argument about exactly what is in the 'Bible'? there is no one translation that actually manages to accurately say what was in the original. I suppose you could rephrase it to say what is in a Bible or even say which translation you use. So much trouble has been caused by people simplly not knowing what the original says....

 

[oftheherd1]

Ok, question for people of faith.

Do you believe your God is there? Or do you know he is there?

I believe my God is omnipresent. So wherever your 'there' is, yes I believe He is there.

As to believing or knowing He is there, that seems to me a whole different thread. It really kind of depends on one's understanding of 'knowing' there is a God (based on one's belief), and that he is omnipresent.

How do you see the difference, if any, between believing and knowing?

 

[jezr74]

I am not sure that Galileo would completely agree with that but an argument could be made that the Church got involved and mucked things up. But I am not so sure Alfred Wegener would agree either because most scientists at the time thought he was a nut and on the fringe... but he was right and the scientists of the time were wrong.

That's right, but what is real sticks, what is garbage will be thrown out eventually and will not hold up over time.

 

[oftheherd1]

Are we going to have the argument about exactly what is in the 'Bible'? there is no one translation that actually manages to accurately say what was in the original. I suppose you could rephrase it to say what is in a Bible or even say which translation you use. So much trouble has been caused by people simplly not knowing what the original says....

Wow, thanks for your accepting the Christian New Testament as in fact part of the Bible.

Please don't take humbrage, I'm just poking fun at what I see as not defining the Bible as what I know you mean it to be, when you are sort of smacking my chops. :uhyeah:

You are correct there are many translations of the Bible for Christians. I personally only accept the King James version, and that is what I quoted. I believe in the Old and New Testaments as making up the entire Bible. I am aware that is not your belief. That is your choice. You are free to believe in any translation you choose, or any version, such as what we call the Old Testament, only, as am I to believe in the King James and Old and New Testament. So is anyone else free to believe as they want. I am only stating what I believe.

 

[jezr74]

I believe my God is omnipresent. So wherever your 'there' is, yes I believe He is there. As to believing or knowing He is there, that seems to me a whole different thread. It really kind of depends on one's understanding of 'knowing' there is a God (based on one's belief), and that he is omnipresent.

How do you see the difference, if any, between believing and knowing?

Attempting to discern if "belief" and "fact" (maybe evidence based is a better term) can be the same? Trying to point out the context I'm using when I say Atheism is not a belief.

 

[jezr74]

As I stated and it has yet to be challenged: we will all die eventually. At that time, any doubts or questions you had either way will definitely be laid to rest along with your body.

yes, but I don't have doubts I will return to the matter from which I came.

 

[Tez3]

Wow, thanks for your accepting the Christian New Testament as in fact part of the Bible.

Please don't take humbrage, I'm just poking fun at what I see as not defining the Bible as what I know you mean it to be, when you are sort of smacking my chops. :uhyeah:

You are correct there are many translations of the Bible for Christians. I personally only accept the King James version, and that is what I quoted. I believe in the Old and New Testaments as making up the entire Bible. I am aware that is not your belief. That is your choice. You are free to believe in any translation you choose, or any version, such as what we call the Old Testament, only, as am I to believe in the King James and Old and New Testament. So is anyone else free to believe as they want. I am only stating what I believe.

I put 'Bible' in inverted commas you may have noticed which doesn't imply any acceptance because as you know the 'Bible' is what you call it, I don't.
Now the thing is, you seem confused about what we believe. What you call the 'Old Testament' is totally Jewish in origin, it starts and ends being Jewish writing so how you can think any translation including the King James can be correct I'm not sure. If you don't read it in the original language, it isn't correct. This is the writing of my people, that other non Jewish people choose to translate it and take it to mean whatever doesn't change the fact that the only version that is correct is the one in it's original form. What you call the 'New Testament' means nothing to me.

 

[oftheherd1]

I put 'Bible' in inverted commas you may have noticed which doesn't imply any acceptance because as you know the 'Bible' is what you call it, I don't.
Now the thing is, you seem confused about what we believe. What you call the 'Old Testament' is totally Jewish in origin, it starts and ends being Jewish writing so how you can think any translation including the King James can be correct I'm not sure. If you don't read it in the original language, it isn't correct. This is the writing of my people, that other non Jewish people choose to translate it and take it to mean whatever doesn't change the fact that the only version that is correct is the one in it's original form. What you call the 'New Testament' means nothing to me.

I think we have had this conversation before. I accept what you say as your belief. If I understand, you only believe as God's word, that which I would call the Old Testament, but for you, only that which is in the original language. If that is your belief, and that is good for you so be it.

Since you ask, and since I don't speak Hebrew at all, much less fluently, I have to rely on a translation. Things are translated from one language to another all the time, and have been in times past. The problem obviously, is the accuracy of the translation. My personal belief is that the King James is the most accurate translation into English.

Those who believe as I do believe in fact, that the King James is a translation inspired by God, who guided those responsible for it, to be correct. That is "...so how you can think any translation including the King James can be correct I'm not sure." I understand you do not share my belief, nor do many others.

I also understand you don't believe in what I call the New Testament. That is a decision you are free to make for yourself, as is my belief it is the the inspired word of God. I don't use that as an excuse to put down your belief, nor would I hope you or anyone else would try to put down my belief. We all have our beliefs, or as some in this thread, an apparent non-belief. Discussing them can be fruitful, but to argue about them would not.

I would add just a couple of questions. Do you believe what you call the Bible is exclusive property of the Jewish people, not to be used by any non-Jewish people? Do speak the language of that Bible fluently, and if not, how do you know whoever translates it for you into English is translating correctly? Do you believe it is impossible to correctly translate the language of that Bible into another language?

Please be sure I am not trying to be confrontational, just to understand how you believe what you do.

 

[Tez3]

I think we have had this conversation before. I accept what you say as your belief. If I understand, you only believe as God's word, that which I would call the Old Testament, but for you, only that which is in the original language. If that is your belief, and that is good for you so be it.

Since you ask, and since I don't speak Hebrew at all, much less fluently, I have to rely on a translation. Things are translated from one language to another all the time, and have been in times past. The problem obviously, is the accuracy of the translation. My personal belief is that the King James is the most accurate translation into English.

Those who believe as I do believe in fact, that the King James is a translation inspired by God, who guided those responsible for it, to be correct. That is "...so how you can think any translation including the King James can be correct I'm not sure." I understand you do not share my belief, nor do many others.

I also understand you don't believe in what I call the New Testament. That is a decision you are free to make for yourself, as is my belief it is the the inspired word of God. I don't use that as an excuse to put down your belief, nor would I hope you or anyone else would try to put down my belief. We all have our beliefs, or as some in this thread, an apparent non-belief. Discussing them can be fruitful, but to argue about them would not.

I would add just a couple of questions. Do you believe what you call the Bible is exclusive property of the Jewish people, not to be used by any non-Jewish people? Do speak the language of that Bible fluently, and if not, how do you know whoever translates it for you into English is translating correctly? Do you believe it is impossible to correctly translate the language of that Bible into another language?

Please be sure I am not trying to be confrontational, just to understand how you believe what you do.

I don't know whether it makes any difference to you but the King James Bible is actually a Roman Catholic translation not a Protestant one. The first Bibles in America weren't the King James ones but the Geneva copies. Purely understand English history means I doubt this translation, it's nothing to do with what I beleve in faithwise. It's nothing to do with religion more to do with the man King James was.
http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

As to the 'Old Testament', this I believe was written by Jews, about Jews and for Jews. It's Jewish history, Jewish law and customs. I don't honestly see why non Jews take it, mess around with it and proclaim it as theirs. It's not relevant to non Jews unless they convert and even then it's still not their history. I haven't 'decided' not to believe in the New Testament it simply has no relevance to me in the same way as a scuba diving manual has no relevance to me.
Non Jews using the Old Testament is akin to people of one country taking another's history and customs as their own, why would they? America fought a war with GB to gain it's independence why would they then slavishly copy everything English? They don't so why use the 'Old Testament' as if it were yours? why do you think things that happened in lands so far away so many thousands of years ago is relevant to your life? That's a serious question not an accusation. it's not that I think non Jews shouldn't use our writings it's just I don't see how relevant it can be to them when they aren't Jews. Again it's like reading and believing everything a scuba diving manual says when you live in the desert and even if you didn't you have no intention of ever entering the water. If you aren't Jewish why would you take as your own something that is so inherently Jewish? it puzzles me quite often I must admit, mostly because of the feelings of many against the Jews of which Jesus was one, and he was very much a Jew. I don't think he intended his followers not to be Jewish even if they had to convert.

My copy of the Pentateuch and Haftorahs are in Hebrew and English as is my prayer book, I can read both, though that's where my Hebrew stops I'm afraid.

 

[crushing]

Agreed and requoted for truth. I posted that earlier and no one talked about it.

Atheism is a "belief" unless we want to change the accepted definition of the word, or redefine it with caveats.

Belief

1. An acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
2. Something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.

The accepted definitions of belief suggest that beliefs are formed on emotions, feelings, and/or unsubstantiated opinions rather than by critical science based investigations. For example, a child (or an adult for that matter) may believe in Santa Claus, ghosts, or other supernatural or imaginary creatures. To try to equate the belief in such fairy tales with reasoned thinking loosens the definition of the word belief to the point where it become a useless word, other than to use it in an attempt to give ignorance equal footing and credibility with empirical knowledge.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Belief

1. An acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
2. Something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.

The accepted definitions of belief suggest that beliefs are formed on emotions, feelings, and/or unsubstantiated opinions rather than by critical science based investigations. For example, a child (or an adult for that matter) may believe in Santa Claus, ghosts, or other supernatural or imaginary creatures. To try to equate the belief in such fairy tales with reasoned thinking loosens the definition of the word belief to the point where it become a useless word, other than to use it in an attempt to give ignorance equal footing and credibility with empirical knowledge.

Or a scientists accepts the theory of plate tectonics and accepts the fact that the earth’s crust is not solid....he/she came to this conclusion based on testing and study……. there for believes the theory of plate tectonics is correct … there no emotion involved.

I have to tell all in this thread this is beginning to feel like a meeting I walked out of a few years back once it degraded into a discussion/slash argument about the political correctness of the use of the word "is" on a webpage I maintained.....

 

[Tez3]

Why do people worry so much about what others believe? As long as they don't force their beliefs on you nor cause harm elsewhere why care what people believe in? In this day and age surely we can accept that we all have different thoughts and ideas on the how, what, where and when of our existance.
Am I wrong to believe what I do, perhaps, perhaps not but it suits me. You can't ask more than that surely!

 

[Xue Sheng]

Why do people worry so much about what others believe? As long as they don't force their beliefs on you nor cause harm elsewhere why care what people believe in? In this day and age surely we can accept that we all have different thoughts and ideas on the how, what, where and when of our existance.
Am I wrong to believe what I do, perhaps, perhaps not but it suits me. You can't ask more than that surely!

Well, of course you are wrong, that is unless you cleared it through me first... But you must take into account that I am a deluded, controlling, and a megalomaniac with an incredibly high opinion of my importance as to all things everything and, although I don't agree...and I'm never wrong... and it has also been said that I have delusions of grandeur... although, agian, I am fairly sure that is not true..

 

[arnisador]

Why do people worry so much about what others believe? As long as they don't force their beliefs on you nor cause harm elsewhere

There you go. The battle to keep creationism out of school science classes continues in many places here; religious attempts to restrict basic human rights (abortion, birth-control, marriage equality) are a constant battle; and so on. And that's without the explicit violence, such as killings of cartoonists drawing Muhammad. That's why people care. No one is concerned that some Buddhist is meditating in a cave somewhere--knock yourself out with that one.

 

[Tez3]

There you go. The battle to keep creationism out of school science classes continues in many places here; religious attempts to restrict basic human rights (abortion, birth-control, marriage equality) are a constant battle; and so on. And that's without the explicit violence, such as killings of cartoonists drawing Muhammad. That's why people care. No one is concerned that some Buddhist is meditating in a cave somewhere--knock yourself out with that one.

As I said on another thread, isn't America turning into a facist state?

The interference is one sided for the most part, only one religion feels the need to impose so much on anyone else. The Muslims take umbrage of course when they feel threatened but to be honest they've had to put up with as much as we have from the same religious fervour. Only the Christians care about who isn't a Christian and if they are what brand they are.
There are very few Christian sects who don't feel the need to shove their beliefs on us, possibly only the Quakers and the Amish don't preach at us and urge us to convert. If Christians could stop trying to convert the rest of the world to their beliefs, it would be a much more comfortable world. I'm sure they mean well but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[crushing]

Or a scientists accepts the theory of plate tectonics and accepts the fact that the earth’s crust is not solid....he/she came to this conclusion based on testing and study……. there for believes the theory of plate tectonics is correct … there no emotion involved.

I have to tell all in this thread this is beginning to feel like a meeting I walked out of a few years back once it degraded into a discussion/slash argument about the political correctness of the use of the word "is" on a webpage I maintained.....

Exactly! This is a good example of the limitation of the word belief. A belief in the Easter Bunny becomes equal with the further understanding of plate tectonics. Is there a different word to use than "belief" when it comes to evidence based knowledge of what is? Because they really aren't the same thing.

 

[crushing]

Anybody else getting the Vineyard Church context sensitive Google ad at the top of the page of a Darwin fish with legs kissing a Jesus fish? I couldn't help but smile when I saw it.

 

[oftheherd1]

I don't know whether it makes any difference to you but the King James Bible is actually a Roman Catholic translation not a Protestant one. The first Bibles in America weren't the King James ones but the Geneva copies. Purely understand English history means I doubt this translation, it's nothing to do with what I beleve in faithwise. It's nothing to do with religion more to do with the man King James was.
http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

Wow, I don't know where you get your information, but it is incorrect. The first Catholic translation into English was the Douay-Rheims published in 1582. The Catholic church had been trying desperately to prevent the publishing of a Bible, but when they found that wasn't working, they published the Douay-Rheims. Prior to that, they had killed anyone they could get their hands on, if they were trying to publish an English translation of the Bible. The Catholic English translations are very different from the King James Bible in the theology they support.

The history of the King James comes from John Wycliffe (a Catholic priest), through William Tyndale (another Catholic priest), Myles Coverdale, John Rogers, and the Geneva (first translated by a committee), and then the King James Authorized Bible translation in 1611. King James was not a Catholic. The committee translating the King James used primarily the Textus Receptus, and Tyndale's prior translations. The Catholic church has used the Vaticanus and the Sinaiaticus in their English translations, as have some of the 'modern' English translations.

As to the 'Old Testament', this I believe was written by Jews, about Jews and for Jews. It's Jewish history, Jewish law and customs. I don't honestly see why non Jews take it, mess around with it and proclaim it as theirs. It's not relevant to non Jews unless they convert and even then it's still not their history. I haven't 'decided' not to believe in the New Testament it simply has no relevance to me in the same way as a scuba diving manual has no relevance to me.

Well, personally, I consider it the word of God. Therefore, I couldn't discount or ignore it. I don't think anyone has a lock on the 'word of God.' Therefore neither you nor I can own it. Now as to mess with it, I don't understand that. It has simply been translated into English. If that offends you I am sorry for you. But as I said, I believe it to be the word of God to instruct those who believe in Him, and choose to follow His word. I know there is history in the Old Testament, but it is instructional history. Do you only see it as history, law, and customs for Jews, with no inspired words from God for you and others who believe in Him to live by?

Non Jews using the Old Testament is akin to people of one country taking another's history and customs as their own, why would they? America fought a war with GB to gain it's independence why would they then slavishly copy everything English? They don't so why use the 'Old Testament' as if it were yours? why do you think things that happened in lands so far away so many thousands of years ago is relevant to your life? That's a serious question not an accusation. t's not that I think non Jews shouldn't use our writings it's just I don't see how relevant it can be to them when they aren't Jews. Again it's like reading and believing everything a scuba diving manual says when you live in the desert and even if you didn't you have no intention of ever entering the water. If you aren't Jewish why would you take as your own something that is so inherently Jewish?

My belief is that the Old Testament is the basis for all that is taught in the New Testament. As you know, I believe in Jesus Christ as God and man, and the messiah. Jesus himself often referred to the Old Testament and taught from it. He also said he did not come to do away with the Old Testament, but to fulfil it. I am not trying to steal the Old Testament, but accept it as God's word just as much as the New Testament. I believe it is God's word that I must read, understand, and take to heart just as much as the New Testament.

I understand you don't believe in the New Testament. That is your choice.

it puzzles me quite often I must admit, mostly because of the feelings of many against the Jews of which Jesus was one, and he was very much a Jew. I don't think he intended his followers not to be Jewish even if they had to convert.

I have read how many have persecuted the Jews. I am not one of them. I don't agree with it. I don't blame all Jews past or present for killing Jesus, any more than I blame all Romans past and present. It is my belief that Jesus came to die and shed His blood so I and others could be saved. Who killed Him has little impact on my faith in my belief. But I am happy in my belief that Jesus died and she His blood so I could be saved.

My copy of the Pentateuch and Haftorahs are in Hebrew and English as is my prayer book, I can read both, though that's where my Hebrew stops I'm afraid.

Why is it also in English?

Edit: It occurs to me this may be a bit of a move away from the question of the OP. I only intend to answer Tez3 or any others as to my belief, which isn't atheism.