Theta_Sigma: I am not going to bother delving into other situations, but since when was the Spanish Inquisition justice? I am not trying to be rude or condemn your beliefs, but I am curious how anyone could consider that mess as justice in any way, shape or form.

scampywiak: Yeah, don't trust the atheists, they use too much logic. The truth is, at heart, most people don't really believe that a bearded dude in the sky controls the universe. But it's socially unacceptable to admit this. I mean think about it, you'd look like an idiot if you formerly believed some desert dwelling jew died and came back to life cause his dad created every single solar system, every single sun and planet and living thing, and this god just happens to care if you work on Sundays and if you masturbate, or look at a woman and admire her ass. Doesn't he have larger concerns? Who the hell wants to admit to believing such nonsense?

s23021536: So my question is this: How do you your religious family members and friends feel about your absence of faith and having you around? Do they know? Are you a closeted atheist as it were?

Piranjade: I live in the northern part of Germany and here nobody cares if you believe in a god (or several) or not. In some of the smaller villages in the south it might be a problem to be openly atheistic but not here. Here, it is generally accepted that religion should be a private thing.

My parents and my mother's parents aren't very religious and don't really care that I'm an atheist. My sister is agnostic.

My father's parents might have cared but the topic somehow didn't come up back then, and now they're dead.

My husband is a Christian but not affiliated with any church. He is religious though. The topic does come up between us but not in a negative way. I respect his belief and can see that it can give him strength in difficult times. He can see that I'm completely alright with my lack of belief and understands that believing isn't something that can be taught or given to me.

We have a little son (2 years old) and have agreed that we will be open about me being an atheist and my husband being religious and will try to teach him that both is completely fine as long as both sides respect each other and treat each other well.
I do believe that knowledge about religion is important and will try to share my curiosity about different beliefs with my son.

My friends and colleagues also know that I'm an atheist, if they were present when that topic came up. Like I said before, religion is seen as a private matter here and isn't really talked about that much.

s23021536: It seems to me that there are a fair number of atheists, or at least irreligious, people on the forum. Now, of course it depends on where you are in the world, but I think it is perhaps rather likely (or not very unlikely) that you might form part of a minority in your extended circle of friends and family. So my question is this: How do you your religious family members and friends feel about your absence of faith and having you around? Do they know? Are you a closeted atheist as it were? I wouldn't blame anyone if they were. I once read a study (forgot the name: something along the line of "Do you trust in atheists?") in which the study presented evidence towards the statement that atheists are the least trusted group in America, and I don't think it is restricted to America. Its not an absolutely damning study though : the sample sizes were quite small - most studies were with groups of 150ish people.

pimpmonkey2382: Either way it would be god of the gaps, which is really weak anyway.

FAButzke: I'm agnostic and I hate both extremes of the "faith" (and get flak from both).

In one hand you have the religious fanatic that have the sick need of "converting" you and shoving "his" beliefs down your throat ("his" because he think it's his beliefs but in truth it's someone elses beliefs and he is just following them blindly)
In the other hand you have the atheist fanatic who insist in saying you are a moron because you believe in A or B at every opportunity he gets and still can't see he is not much better by believing blindly in science and the scientists (namely his god and their priests).

I hate you both. Both sides are full of shit and make ample use of what I call: "The ctrl+c and ctrl+v knowledge". Religious fanactics don't really know jack about anything and just repeat what the priests told them repeat: they don't have a personal opinion, their opinion is the one their religion dictactes.
Atheists fanactics don't really know jack about anything and just repeat what the scientists told them: they don't have a personal opinion and their opinion is what science (at the moment) dictates.

Atheists love to feel superior and to preach about free thinking and stuff. The truth is, most of them are so narrow minded as much as the very individuals they hate it so much: religious people. Most of them are so arrogant that even an arrogant bastard as myself get sick around them. You would think that an open minded person would be more tolerant of others, especially one that believes that nothing is set in stone and everything can change as new knowledge comes forth to shed more light on matters. But no. Instead of saying "I can't be sure of that but, based on our current knowledge I THINK it's this way" they go: "You are dumfuck for believing that. It's been proven that it's this way, you idiot".

Religious people are no less annoying. The very notion of critical thinking is a sin to them and they won't even try it. If religion was so good and really was the word of God then you would not have so many of them, but instead just one. So, in reality we have thousands of religions, all saying different shit about everything and still all claiming to be the truth. That's really stupid, if you ask me.

Everyone is free to believe in what they want: be it science or religion. But know this: both sides are slaves to someone else's opinion and most of you don't have your own.

Atheists: If you believe in evolution, the big bang and that sort of stuff without a single doubt, I have bad news for you: you have a religion.

Religious folk: If you can't question your beliefs and you can't do this or that because someone told you can't, I have bad news for you: you don't have free will and your mind is not your own. You are just a shell of a person, a husk, and you are indoctrinated.

Having said all that, I wish every single one of you a very nice day. Peace!

FAButzke: In one hand you have the religious fanatic that have the sick need of "converting" you and shoving "his" beliefs down your throat

FAButzke: In the other hand you have the atheist fanatic who insist in saying you are a moron because you believe in A or B at every opportunity he gets and still can't see he is not much better by believing blindly in science and the scientists (namely his god and their priests).

FAButzke: Atheists fanactics don't really know jack about anything and just repeat what the scientists told them: they don't have a personal opinion and their opinion is what science (at the moment) dictates.

FAButzke: You would think that an open minded person would be more tolerant of others, especially one that believes that nothing is set in stone and everything can change as new knowledge comes forth to shed more light on matters.

FAButzke: But no. Instead of saying "I can't be sure of that but, based on our current knowledge I THINK it's this way" they go: "You are dumfuck for believing that. It's been proven that it's this way, you idiot".

FAButzke: Everyone is free to believe in what they want: be it science or religion. But know this: both sides are slaves to someone else's opinion and most of you don't have your own.

FAButzke: Atheists: If you believe in evolution, the big bang and that sort of stuff without a single doubt, I have bad news for you: you have a religion.

Brasas: I note you were the one bringing an obligation - "need to proof" - into the above. It's a strawman...
You don't need to prove the falsehood, unless you want to prove the falsehood (and you do, clearly). As agnostic you might find a less "demanding" position. ;)

Krypsyn: Nah, I'll pass. You have heard me respond to several of your hypotheticals, and I answered essentially the same way each time. I presume you can guess what my response would probably be at this point. If you can't... well... *shrug*

jamotide: You don't have to "trust" any scientist, you can verify what they say, and if that is not possible nobody will believe them. That is the whole point of science.
[/quote_1167]
Unless you've personally verified every single experiment, you're trusting what the scientists say who did those experiments. If other scientists verify the first scientist's experiment, then that means that you're trusting a larger group of scientists. The fact remains that you have knowledge that is based entirely on what others have told you is true. jamotide: Scientists could be lying too because hoaxes do appear from time to time. People still widely believe the lie that they only use 10% of their brain. If he is lying and you choose to cross, that just means that your faith was misplaced and that you had knowledge was incorrect. jamotide: The first example you gave wasn't actually a case of circular reasoning. The second example would have been circular, but it wasn't actually something I said, and it was in fact something I disagreed with. jamotide: I did willfully refuse to explain in that response, but you are still willfully ignorant because I have already explain in this thread, and it is something you could easily look up. It starts with the mountain if historical evidence. jamotide: So people think that is stronger evidence that their interpretation of Genesis is true than there is for evolution. For instance, some people take rings in ice cores to be an indication of how many years have passed, like tree rings. However, those rings can actually form much faster than yearly cycles. So they are not against science, but they think that scientific evidence has been misinterpreted by scientists to indicate that the Earth is much older than it actually is.

monkeydelarge: What other evidence do you have other than the "evidence" in the bible? How come, Jesus didn't write anything in the bible, himself? How come, the Roman writers of that time, didn't write about Jesus but wrote about everything else?

Soyeong: Soyeong: God is sovereign, so He has the right to take and give life as He sees fit. If someone in a country commits a capital crime and receives a capital punishment, that does not mean the government is a murderous 1984 dictatorship. Soyeong: You don't seem to be fully aware of what circular reasoning is, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Soyeong: Here is some evidence for Jesus from non-Christian sources.

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm

Brasas: You're being "smart" in selecting what to answer, but ultimately you keep conflating knowledge with belief. A very Garden of Eden situation...