Atheist??
-
The_highlander — 15 years ago(November 02, 2010 01:09 AM)
No, the song is strictly against religion, just as John Lennon was quoted as saying many times. He dislike religion, period. A lot of people try to justify it as a dislike of organized religion, but that is false, he was a strict non-believer and felt that religion was one of the biggest problems with our world. I know a lot of people that claim to like him or to be a fan of his music but can't accept this fact and try to twist his word to suit their beliefs. It's amazing, not only for their lack of respect, but also their willingness to delude themselves in the very same way he was against. Gotta love hypocrites.
-
Alinos — 15 years ago(February 18, 2011 08:24 PM)
But there's a distinct difference between religion and Belief
There are few thing's that truely seperate people into groups these days. some people are die hard racists but you will see that drop off as we have more generations of people even more mixed race and less Pure race communitys
Religion is the biggy though
i mean thanks to the islamic extremists theres an entire section of the world now branded as full of terrorists.
We Also Had Religion's Gift of the Dark Ages and the crusades
Believing there is a higher power is your own choice.
following a belief set of rules(Religion) that the higher power somehow gives a crap if you eat pork. causes wars
Religion merely plays on the fears of people, those who want to live forever those who feel guilty oversomething they have done.
Religion is essentially law that says it doesn't matter if the cops catch you for that murder spree because in the end you can't escape the all seeing eye of justice(God) well unless you confess to some guy in a box -
The_highlander — 14 years ago(July 01, 2011 08:40 PM)
No, there is no difference between religion and belief. Technically religion is belief. Whether that belief involves a set of rules and/or practices or whether it is only an idea that you adhere to but do not dawdle your time on doesn't matter. People now are lazy and don't use the proper terminology, but that doesn't change the actual meanings. This wasn't true as much in Lennon's time.
Either you believe in something or not. The only real argument is whether believing in nothing constitutes a religion which I say yes, going by the definitions. The only way you can truly be without religion is to never develop an opinion on the subject or to stay ignorant of the possibility, period. Which is pretty much impossible in this day.
Calling something a higher power is a cop out for people that don't want to admit they are agnostic or atheist yet who also usually aren't willing to come out against religions. Higher power and God are basically the same thing. The only difference is what people feel are expected of themselves in relation to those different ideas.
Claiming a belief in a higher power eliminates the need to be subservient to an organized religious doctrine, but it is no less a religion in the same regard as believing in god but not the bible. The only difference is how people choose to react to their belief. The God believer may pray where as the person who claims a higher power may not. I know a lot of people who claim to believe in God but not the bible and live and believe everything just like people who claim a higher power. The difference is only in name.
I am not sure exactly what point you were trying to make, whether it was he believed in a higher power or what, but John Lennon never stated a single thing that I have ever heard about a "higher power". Pretty much every time he ever talked about anything to do with religion he was totally against it. If you are trying to claim he believed in a higher power (without proof he said this) you are doing exactly what I was speaking of in my original post. You can't say he believed in something when he never said or even insinuated that he did.
People always want their idols to be like them as much as possible, especially when it comes to beliefs. I know several people who love Paul Bettany but absolutely refuse to believe he is an atheist, because he has played many parts surrounded in religion (Legion, The Da Vinci Code, and now Priest). They come up with every excuse under the sun, but it makes the fact no less true -
cross-12 — 16 years ago(August 25, 2009 01:21 PM)
Atheists and the theists have one thing in common: Their views are based on faitheither faith that God does not exist, or faith that God does. After all, God's existance can neither be proven nor disproven scientifically. Therefore anyone who has an opinion about God's existance (or lack thereof) must base that opinion on faith.
-
Can_a_bitch_get_a_donut — 16 years ago(October 21, 2009 02:35 AM)
False, cross-12.
That's like saying it takes faith in order for you to not believe in flying purple unicorns, since you cannot disprove their existence.
We don't believe in gods because of a complete and total lack of evidence. It's not a leap of faith. It's not a conclusion we come to. It's not a giant mystery where we take sides on the issue. Atheism isn't the answer to a question.
It's not "believers" and "non-believers."
It's the human race and some of them have imaginary friends (with all due respect).
\o/ STEVE HOLT! -
cross-12 — 15 years ago(August 19, 2010 10:54 AM)
I see nothing wrong in basing the belief that flying purple unicorns don't exist on the absence of evidence that they do exist. It's just a fact that some things can't be proven one way or the other and that one has to form one's beliefs on faith in the absence of facts one way or the other.
-
darren_heeney — 15 years ago(October 07, 2010 04:53 PM)
"That's like saying it takes faith in order for you to not believe in flying purple unicorns, since you cannot disprove their existence.
We don't believe in gods because of a complete and total lack of evidence. It's not a leap of faith. It's not a conclusion we come to. It's not a giant mystery where we take sides on the issue. Atheism isn't the answer to a question. "
That's complete nonsense and just illustrates your complete lack of understanding when it comes to philosophical issues.
Firstly, if my memory serves me correctly "flying purple unicorns" would exist in our world/time/space and therefore we would be able to observe them. A god or diety from the Religions that I have studied personally would exist outwith/beyond our time and space and therefore would not be directly observable by us.
I can see that you, like many other Atheist's adopt the arrogant self deluding stance of some form of intelle2000ctual snobbery. All the time being so blinded by your arrogance you fail to see how irrational and illogical many of the arguements you present agaist theism are.
Oh and no, I'm not a Christian/Muslim/Jew or any or kind of theist, I simply recognise the arrogance and irrational copy and paste arguements parroted over and over by keyboard warrior atheists. -
Can_a_bitch_get_a_donut — 15 years ago(October 07, 2010 06:43 PM)
Wacky. If you're arguing that I copied and pasted anything in my post a year ago, I did no such thing. They were all my words, but you probably just mean that others make similar arguments. And of course they do.
For my analogy, if it helps you, you are welcome to put these flying purple unicorns outside of our solar system or even outside of our universe, and my argument is exactly the same. Again, my point was, without a shred of evidence, I personally find no reason to even consider the possibility. That is all.
\o/ STEVE HOLT! -
!!!deleted!!! (19664510) — 13 years ago(September 04, 2012 05:25 AM)
Fact: God does not exist.
Fact: Those who believe in gods are delusional.
Fact: Sam Beckett believed in God.
Fact: Sam Beckett was delusional.
The only difference 'tween Jesus and the Walking Dead: Jesus asked others to eat HIS flesh. -
nilbog44 — 11 years ago(May 31, 2014 12:21 PM)
Your logic is hilariously awful. You can't prove something doesn't exist. I believe in the flying spaghetti monster. Ok now prove it doesn't exist waiting. You can't. See how bad your logic is? If you believe in god then the burden of proof is on YOU to prove he exists. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.