Atheism 2.0
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-01-2012, 09:56 PM
RE: Atheism 2.0
Regarding Atheists and church...

When you have reached a logical conclusion on you own, you do not need a group of people telling you that your belief in something absurd is correct so that you can keep believing the absurd.

You are taught in seminary school to keep them involved in the church on a regular basis. The best is the "small groups" where peer pressure has the most impact. Miss a bible study meeting and you'll get a phone call. When they start missing church it is a progressive spiral until they stop coming.

I can not speak with another atheist for months and never change my position on the existence of god. Only the arrival of a god in person will alter my perspective at this point in the game.

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thomas's post
24-01-2012, 11:21 PM
RE: Atheism 2.0
(24-01-2012 05:18 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Except me, I'm the only one in the world who has it straight.

Sounds like a motto for zero-state. Zero-state morality finds a concise spokesman in Johnny Cantor; it's just me and my Gwynnies. My moral code is zeroed to my identity which is zeroed to my integrity; all of which reduces to I love.

Zero-state is the type of vision atheism lacks, it is the type of vision atheism needs; it is the type of vision that can only manifest by becoming other than atheist... Blue Suns faction, is the working title. How can atheists agree on anything? Simply because most everything really doesn't matter. I'm content in knowing 4.

Like if I stole 4 words and their context from humanity, civilization would end. An atheist could logically deduce a likely pair - love and truth - but the other dynamic duo ironically represents the science behind the scenes... can you guess?

Morality and faith.

...which means precisely zero without the entirety of the prime 4 - I love my Gwynnies. 4 what 4; the logical atheist is free to dismiss as semantics, what I see as mnemonic device. Wink

[Image: 10289811_592837817482059_8815379025397103823_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
25-01-2012, 06:14 AM
RE: Atheism 2.0
Quote:When you have reached a logical conclusion on you own, you do not need a group of people telling you that your belief in something absurd is correct so that you can keep believing the absurd.

Well said Thomas. I agree.

I think there are a couple of other motivators for theist leaders to contact AWOL members of thier flock. There's the financial motivation, if your sheep is either considering another supplier (another place of worship) or stopping thier spend entirely then that represents lost revenue for the church leadership.

There's likely genuine concern for the AWOL sheep also. I'm sure we all know plenty of theists who are lovely (if misguided) people who really do care if people aren't around and will want to help if the sheep is a little lost.

Probably the thing I miss the most from my life as a Christian is the social interaction. By default I'm lazy and the almost prescriptive social events forced me to stop looking at a computer and interact with people face to face. The realisation that I wasn't going to church becuase I believed in God, but becuase I beleived in people and loved spending time with some fine human beings was both sudden and brutal. And, yes I did recieve the rather difficult calls from 'concerned' church leaders when I stopped going.

As De Botton says, both the camera club & the chess club that I attend could learn an awful lot from the way churches structure thier meetings, encourage audience participation and also position themselves in a very competitive market.

"Christianity is like a diet where you eat lots of chocolate cake all week, and then on Sunday you mentally scold yourself and "try again" only to repeat the cycle." - Buddy Christ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2012, 04:18 PM
RE: Atheism 2.0
(24-01-2012 11:21 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(24-01-2012 05:18 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Except me, I'm the only one in the world who has it straight.

Sounds like a motto for zero-state. Zero-state morality finds a concise spokesman in Johnny Cantor; it's just me and my Gwynnies. My moral code is zeroed to my identity which is zeroed to my integrity; all of which reduces to I love . . . which means precisely zero without the entirety of the prime 4 - I love my Gwynnies. 4 what 4; the logical atheist is free to dismiss as semantics, what I see as mnemonic device. Wink
I'm not sure what this means.

What I am trying to convey is that atheists have things messed up because of their failure to organize peer review process of their social agendas in favor of the big tent gathering of atheists under the doctrine that, "we only have one thing in common."

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2012, 04:35 PM
RE: Atheism 2.0
Wow, Trainwreck returns.

And I thought being a fly on the wall while Trainwreck and Johnny C. have a discussion was nothing but a pipe dream.

Dreams do come true kiddies!

[Image: StarkLord01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stark Raving's post
26-01-2012, 04:39 PM
RE: Atheism 2.0
Well... the infamous Trainwreck.

[Image: 5208.gif]

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: