Atheists: what do you think about all things spiritual/religious? Religious people: what about atheists?

[HonestJoe]

Can you elaborate a little bit?

Ghosts, shape-shifting aliens running the world, using crystals to align your chakra, homeopathy, 5G chips hidden in vaccines, astrology... There are all sorts of "magical thinking" people can believe in and none of them require belief in any gods.

 

[ChristineM]

It doesn't exist yet. We have to develop it ourselves. It would be trite to think there is a God that loves us all and cares about us, but it's even more meaningful when we as humans have to create and develop this God ourselves. The Omniverse is already capable of producing a multitude of Universes, but our function as a human species will be to create technology to bend The Omniverse to help us create more living organisms. God is The Omniverse, Entropy and Extropy, however right now Entropy is thousands of times more powerful than human Extropy, so we have to develop our species Extropic output so that it matches the amount of Universal Entropy there is. When we do this, we will in effect create God itself.

Ahh, if thats what makes you happy.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think what spirituality can be simply described as "magical thinking".

People who believe in a supernatural force I mean. I'm using the term broadly, and it includes everyone not an atheist/agnostic I think pretty much.

Ah.

Personally, I wouldn't call all believers in a "spiritual force" to employ magical thinking.

I think there's enough theistic background noise that I don't see it as a big deal if someone holds a vague belief that something they call "God" created the universe and has some sort of plan.

The sort of magical thinking I have a problem with is the stuff that's contrary to reason. For instance, my ex-wife would pray to find a parking spot at the mall and then when she found one, chalk it up as an answered prayer. IMO, that was a failure of critical thinking on her part.

I think that's where I draw the line: if someone describes their beliefs to me - regardless of the labels they use - and I see failures of critical thinking, that's when my opinion of them will be negatively impacted.

 

[HonestJoe]

Many atheists are actually apistevists but atheism is in vogue right now whereas apistevism isn't.

I must admit I had to look up apistevism.

I'd suggest that the vast, vast majority of people never really sit down and think the whole thing through because it's difficult and scary, so are happy to just roll along with the crowd without realising that, of course, most the rest of the crowd is doing the same. That is why mildly charismatic agitators can so easily and rapidly gain power.

If people were forced to think about it, with some kind of real and apparent consequence for getting it wrong but somehow insulated from any socio-political pressure, both agnostic atheism and apistevism would be the basis of the conclusion for most people (even if they didn't understand the words).

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Many atheists are actually apistevists but atheism is in vogue right now whereas apistevism isn't.

The categories aren't mutually exclusive. One is about the conclusion, one is about the process that leads to the conclusion.

 

[F1fan]

Hey, atheist! What do you think about me?

Specifically, about the fact that I am spiritual/religious; what do you think about that? Does that make me fearful? Foolish? Deluded? Full of myself? Any adjective with a negative connotation?

Immediately it indicates that you are a product of some social influence. Most everyone on the planet is exposed to some religious ideas and how individuals process these ideas and the social pressure differs. As we know from the Ashe experiments the average person will conform to the beliefs of those around them. This is largely due to how the human brain evolved, and how social patterns work in any given environment.

It's an interesting thing when believers are exposed to contrary beliefs and more objective ways of thinking. Again there is a lot of variation among people, and some will self-examine their beliefs and perhaps reject the norms, or have a negative experience and be motivated to double down on their beliefs. I don;t think change happens very often unless there is some sort of crisis. That crisis can motivate a person to commit to a religious framwework to better coe with emotional trauma, or they could have a crisis within religion as it fails to help the person, and they abandon religion as a failed promise.

Your questions assume several things, namely that any given person is rational, emotionally intelligent, willing to change, and skilled at thinking. Generally people remain in their mental framework unless it causes more problems. Many commit to frameworks for the stability it offers am,ong a community of like minded members, a tribe. Huamns are very tribal and few are independent of this trait.

Be honest. What do you think about religious people when considering the fact that they are religious?

Religious people can be rational and hip. There is a huge range of belief, from liberal to extremists. the more extreme the less respect I have for them. Many theists are respectable, so I have no prejudice for theists in general. By their fruits.....

What do you think about religion itself? What adjectives would you use to describe it?

Well I think religion is somewhat obsolete in first world nations. It is declining among more liberal people but growing among the more extreme, which suggests religion is being used as a unilfying mechanism. Look at the American right these days, and despite their high level of religiosity they are very unethical. From the news media (FOX and Newsmax being sued) to politics (Trump, Santos, MTG, Jordan, Boebert) with criminal and unethical behaviors that are accepted to the law (the far right supreme court, namely with Thomas' unethical behavior and the Kacsmaryk ruling that is highly improper legally) we see the far right being an unconstitutional threat to civil stability, all motivated by religious belief. These are reasons for a separation of religion and state business

I was taught in church that atheists are not to be your good friends. (This held true for other groups, but focusing on atheists here). Preach to them, yes, but don't really befriend them. They are not part of the brotherhood. Atheists are in fact blind to reality. They cannot see the truth (the truth being that Jesus Christ is God). Jesus Christ's godhood is readily apparent to those possessed by the holy spirit. It is logical. So atheists are illogical. I mean, think about it. They think we literally came from monkeys. How stupid can you be? Plus, if they are not on Jesus's side, they are on the devils side. The literal devil, dude.

That's a good example of negative influence by a religion that looks to control it's followers with fear. That's a tradition in the Abrahamis religions, and could often be learned behavior. Religious belief guarantees nothing along the lines of righteousness and morality. Look at the "Does Atheism lead to immoral behavior" and see the difference in moral attitudes between theists and atheists. The discussion is now revealing immoral attitudes by religious people, not atheists. Atheists actually advocate for a high moral standard.

I don't see atheists as morally deficient or agents of the opposition or anything. I know spirituality is not for my boyfriend, I don't want to force it on him. He's a way better person than me, imo. And he's does that as an atheist, without spiritual guidance.

I argue that anyone who is in emotional, intellectual, and physical balance are spiritual people, and it may include religious people. Many more extreme religious folks seem to think their head full of irrational concepts is spiritual when much of what it causes is them inner conflict and stress.

I believe in a greater power. It's literally there I think. So I think atheists are simply missing out on a valuable tool.

What tool that isn't imaginary? Describe the tool and its utility.

 

[Heyo]

Hey, atheist! What do you think about me?

Specifically, about the fact that I am spiritual/religious; what do you think about that? Does that make me fearful? Foolish? Deluded?

Yep, that last one fits. Religion/spirituality fits exactly the criteria for delusion in the DSM, so they had to explicitly exclude them from the diagnose. Otherwise delusion would be the default state of mind. (Which it probably is.)

Huxley, as you might know, (re-)introduced Agnosticism to the western philosophical canon. I am an Agnostic.

Having said that, most people aren't delusional about most of their everyday life. There is a wide spectrum and only at the extreme end of it religion influences my interaction with believers.

 

[Curious George]

Hey, atheist! What do you think about me?

Specifically, about the fact that I am spiritual/religious; what do you think about that? Does that make me fearful? Foolish? Deluded? Full of myself? Any adjective with a negative connotation?

I don’t think of you with any negatively connotative adjectives.

If I were asked to paint broadly(to highlight my biases), I think of religious individuals as people wanting to feel a connection or order in a world where one can often feel disconnected or overwhelmed by chaos.

Be honest. What do you think about religious people when considering the fact that they are religious?

Usually curiosity abounds. I wonder how a person’s story led them to their beliefs and how their beliefs inform and communicate a part of their story.

What do you think about religion itself? What adjectives would you use to describe it?

Religion is so varied that it is hard to articulate my thoughts such that they apply to religion as a whole. I like learning about and pondering how the stories, explanations, and rules/laws/guidance/commandments/etc arose. So perhaps the adjective I would use would be interesting.

The reason I post this is because of a conversation I was having with my 100% atheist boyfriend earlier. I was explaining my elementary knowledge of Hinduism to him, and also just in general what I get out of spiritual practice. I began talking about the source of the Upanishads, the ancient sages. It is my understanding that these ancient sages discovered great truths through their practices, and this knowledge was passed down. I was explaining to him how spiritual practice can help you see the supreme reality, which is what these sages did (right?). When I said that, I thought about how that must sound to him, someone who is a man of science! I told him that what I was saying must sound rather pompous. He smiled and said that was one way of putting it, but he preferred the word "extravagant".

I can tell you how Christians tend to view atheists. When I say Christians, my frame of reference is the community I grew up in. I know it's not an encompassing representation of Christianity, but I think we all know some Christians have a superiority complex, thanks to their religion.

I was taught in church that atheists are not to be your good friends. (This held true for other groups, but focusing on atheists here). Preach to them, yes, but don't really befriend them. They are not part of the brotherhood. Atheists are in fact blind to reality. They cannot see the truth (the truth being that Jesus Christ is God). Jesus Christ's godhood is readily apparent to those possessed by the holy spirit. It is logical. So atheists are illogical. I mean, think about it. They think we literally came from monkeys. How stupid can you be? Plus, if they are not on Jesus's side, they are on the devils side. The literal devil, dude.

I know many Christians in my community who think like this. Rather, I know churches who think like this.

Question for everybody

How do you view those who do not see the way you do? May seem like a silly question with an obvious answer "I don't see them any differently!"
But that's not true for everyone. For me, I see those who do not pursue spirituality as missing out in life. I know it's not for everyone, but, in a way, it is for everyone. I think everyone should be spiritual. I think a shift in collective consciousness towards a collective spiritual growth would be cool. Atheists could contribute to this growth more so than a believer, if they're more moral.

I don't see atheists as morally deficient or agents of the opposition or anything. I know spirituality is not for my boyfriend, I don't want to force it on him. He's a way better person than me, imo. And he's does that as an atheist, without spiritual guidance.

I believe in a greater power. It's literally there I think. So I think atheists are simply missing out on a valuable tool. But many believers can never wield the tools properly anyways, so perhaps the atheist is better off. perhaps they use the spiritual tools by virtue of their goodness.

I view others, who don’t see the way I do as people who can provide a different perspective and understanding.

 

[Nakosis]

Hey, atheist! What do you think about me?

Specifically, about the fact that I am spiritual/religious; what do you think about that? Does that make me fearful? Foolish? Deluded? Full of myself? Any adjective with a negative connotation?

Be honest. What do you think about religious people when considering the fact that they are religious?

I think they are not enlightened.
What I mean by that is if they are following some religion, they are not yet fully weened from letting other people think for them.
You are letting other people define God for you. You are letting others define reality for you.

Spirituality is a slight step away from religion towards enlightenment. A person is beginning to think for themselves however still attached to ideas/concepts originally created by someone else.

What do you think about religion itself? What adjectives would you use to describe it?

Well, not everyone is ready to think for themselves. There is risk in it. It initially is awkward and uncomfortable. And there is a chance of being ostracized for it.

The reason I post this is because of a conversation I was having with my 100% atheist boyfriend earlier. I was explaining my elementary knowledge of Hinduism to him, and also just in general what I get out of spiritual practice. I began talking about the source of the Upanishads, the ancient sages. It is my understanding that these ancient sages discovered great truths through their practices, and this knowledge was passed down. I was explaining to him how spiritual practice can help you see the supreme reality, which is what these sages did (right?). When I said that, I thought about how that must sound to him, someone who is a man of science! I told him that what I was saying must sound rather pompous. He smiled and said that was one way of putting it, but he preferred the word "extravagant".

I can tell you how Christians tend to view atheists. When I say Christians, my frame of reference is the community I grew up in. I know it's not an encompassing representation of Christianity, but I think we all know some Christians have a superiority complex, thanks to their religion.

I was taught in church that atheists are not to be your good friends. (This held true for other groups, but focusing on atheists here). Preach to them, yes, but don't really befriend them. They are not part of the brotherhood. Atheists are in fact blind to reality. They cannot see the truth (the truth being that Jesus Christ is God). Jesus Christ's godhood is readily apparent to those possessed by the holy spirit. It is logical. So atheists are illogical. I mean, think about it. They think we literally came from monkeys. How stupid can you be? Plus, if they are not on Jesus's side, they are on the devils side. The literal devil, dude.

I know many Christians in my community who think like this. Rather, I know churches who think like this.

Sure, you get ostracized thinking for yourself.

Question for everybody

How do you view those who do not see the way you do? May seem like a silly question with an obvious answer "I don't see them any differently!"
But that's not true for everyone. For me, I see those who do not pursue spirituality as missing out in life. I know it's not for everyone, but, in a way, it is for everyone. I think everyone should be spiritual. I think a shift in collective consciousness towards a collective spiritual growth would be cool. Atheists could contribute to this growth more so than a believer, if they're more moral.

I don't see atheists as morally deficient or agents of the opposition or anything. I know spirituality is not for my boyfriend, I don't want to force it on him. He's a way better person than me, imo. And he's does that as an atheist, without spiritual guidance.

I believe in a greater power. It's literally there I think. So I think atheists are simply missing out on a valuable tool. But many believers can never wield the tools properly anyways, so perhaps the atheist is better off. perhaps they use the spiritual tools by virtue of their goodness.

I see them on the path to enlightenment at their own pace. It is not easy to question everything you've learned. Even less easy to start letting go of it.

 

[syo]

Atheists and Abrahamics are married to each other.

 

[Viker]

Being spiritual and religious, I view most atheists as alright folk. There are a few who are meatheads. Every group has their few like that.

 

[ChristineM]

Being spiritual and religious, I view most atheists as alright folk. There are a few who are meatheads. Every group has their few like that.

Including spiritual and religious groups ;-)

 

[ajay0]

Religious people: what about atheists?​

As per Hinduism and Hindu enlightened sages like Anandamayi Ma and Rajini Menon, atheists are also capable of Buddhahood or enlightenment provided they adhere to ethical or virtuous conduct and behavior, which is considered an austerity or spiritual exercise in itself.

 

[viole]

Hey, atheist! What do you think about me?

Not enough information for a sensible answer.

Specifically, about the fact that I am spiritual/religious; what do you think about that? Does that make me fearful? Foolish? Deluded? Full of myself? Any adjective with a negative connotation?

Probably "deluded" is the closest. But I would rather say: victims of a memetic virus.

Be honest. What do you think about religious people when considering the fact that they are religious?

As I said, victims, mainly. Like I was myself a while ago.

The reason I post this is because of a conversation I was having with my 100% atheist boyfriend earlier. I was explaining my elementary knowledge of Hinduism to him, and also just in general what I get out of spiritual practice. I began talking about the source of the Upanishads, the ancient sages. It is my understanding that these ancient sages discovered great truths through their practices, and this knowledge was passed down. I was explaining to him how spiritual practice can help you see the supreme reality, which is what these sages did (right?). When I said that, I thought about how that must sound to him, someone who is a man of science! I told him that what I was saying must sound rather pompous. He smiled and said that was one way of putting it, but he preferred the word "extravagant".

For my perceptions, spirituality either is ill defined, or does not exist. It is a sort of catch all concept for what is not material, but it looks completely meaningless. For me it is just what biological machines made up, because they find it suboptimal to be biological machines only.

As a naturalist, I don't think it exists. At the end of the day, also the most mystic experience stops when oxygen is removed from the machine between our ears producing it. And can be easily influenced by chemicals with a very long name.

I can tell you how Christians tend to view atheists. When I say Christians, my frame of reference is the community I grew up in. I know it's not an encompassing representation of Christianity, but I think we all know some Christians have a superiority complex, thanks to their religion.

Superiority complexes do not exist. Only insecure people feel them, hence, they are in fact a defensive version against an inferiority complex. However, I would not generalize. I know Christians that are perfectly fine with atheists. However, this is Europe, where Christianity is sort of watered down, and more like a tradition, then a real metaphysical belief. And the cultural war is finished.

I was taught in church that atheists are not to be your good friends. (This held true for other groups, but focusing on atheists here). Preach to them, yes, but don't really befriend them. They are not part of the brotherhood. Atheists are in fact blind to reality. They cannot see the truth (the truth being that Jesus Christ is God). Jesus Christ's godhood is readily apparent to those possessed by the holy spirit. It is logical. So atheists are illogical. I mean, think about it. They think we literally came from monkeys. How stupid can you be? Plus, if they are not on Jesus's side, they are on the devils side. The literal devil, dude.

When X accuses Y of blindness, Y could with the same warrant accuse X of hallucinating. Ergo, ceteris paribus, it is not an argument in absence of evidence. But again, I think you are addressing a small minority of fire and brimstone Christians here. And for them, Hindus are equally evil.

How do you view those who do not see the way you do? May seem like a silly question with an obvious answer "I don't see them any differently!"
But that's not true for everyone. For me, I see those who do not pursue spirituality as missing out in life. I know it's not for everyone, but, in a way, it is for everyone. I think everyone should be spiritual. I think a shift in collective consciousness towards a collective spiritual growth would be cool. Atheists could contribute to this growth more so than a believer, if they're more moral.

How I see it? I am actually shocked that people could believe that. And even more shocked that I spent most of my life believing that.

And what is spiritual growth? What does "spiritual" mean? Does spirituality entail believing in deities? What is that? Does spirituality entail awe at the Universe, existence, and all that? What about parasitic wasps and children leukemia and genetic diseases? Should we get spiritual about those, too?

Maybe I am spiritual, maybe I am not. In the same way that maybe I am ajdhgfjha, and maybe I am not. Since I have no clue what spirituality is, in the same way I have no clue what ajdhgfjha is.

And what do you mean that we can contribute if we are more moral. More moral to whom? And who decides that? According to some Christians
I am advertising kids murder because I am pro-choice. So, I am not sure I can ever serve as a moral role model to them.

I don't see atheists as morally deficient or agents of the opposition or anything. I know spirituality is not for my boyfriend, I don't want to force it on him. He's a way better person than me, imo. And he's does that as an atheist, without spiritual guidance.

Atheism is disbelief in God(s). Morality is religion, or lack thereof, independent. For the obvious reason that different religions have different and contradicting moral teachings, anyway.

I believe in a greater power. It's literally there I think. So I think atheists are simply missing out on a valuable tool. But many believers can never wield the tools properly anyways, so perhaps the atheist is better off. perhaps they use the spiritual tools by virtue of their goodness.

I believe in a greater power too. The tax office.

By the way, what tool, are we missing? The dichotomy atheism/theism is false. For the simple reason that there are thousands of theism variants. Thousands of tools. Thousands of spiritualities, moral precepts, traditions, miracles, tenets, and all that stuff.

So, are you advertising for a particular God, or just for belief in a God, no matter how She looks like?

The two things are completely different and usually conflated in all debates concerning the theist vs, atheist worldview.

Ciao

- viole

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Many atheists are actually apistevists but atheism is in vogue right now whereas apistevism isn't.

I'm not sure 'apistevism' was ever 'in vogue'. But the two terms aren't mutually exclusive anyway.

 

[Ella S.]

My answer to the title:

I consider myself spiritual and religious to some degree. However, I do have problems with both of these terms.

"Spirituality" tends to imply a belief in the supernatural or some sort of transpersonal/collective (un)consciousness, which I believe does not exist. I am not an idealist, a dualist, a panpsychist, and do not believe in sin, karma, reincarnation, the afterlife, ghosts, or anything similar. So I disagree with people who root their spirituality in something like animism. There are a lot of mystical concepts of spirituality that I do not have an issue with, although most of them are considered heretical, such as naturalistic approaches to Kabbalah, Cabala, and Qabbalah, pantheistic/deistic forms of Christian contemplation, or materialist approaches to the four margas.

Ironically, this means that there are probably more Hindus that I agree with than Buddhists, because Buddhism inherently includes a complex supernatural metaphysics that I complete reject.

"Religion" is a vague term. Much of its historical use was in the connotation of, "Are you Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or pagan?" Some religions prioritize beliefs. Some prioritize moral teachings. Some prioritize specific spiritual practices. Most have some form of communal ceremony and shared identity. Personally, I think most of religion is for conformists who can't think for themselves so they need a book or a cleric to submit to. I think those people are disgustingly weak minded and have essentially forfeited their status as thinking human beings, and I condemn the predators controlling them, too. I have a particular disregard for people who grew up with one religion and never looked deeper into the subject, just blindly following along with the way they were raised.

That's not a condemnation of religion as a whole, or even organized religion. It's just a condemnation of how religion most commonly manifests. Yes, it manifests this way in India, China, Japan, and so on, too. The Caste system? Divinely appointed emperors? In many ways, they're even worse than the popes and patriarchs of the West, which is really saying something.

I would consider myself religious, in the sense that I am a Stoic, but there's no body of Stoics telling me how to interpret the Stoic texts and the ancient Stoics themselves often disagreed with one another on a variety of topics. I don't have a dogma and I arrived at Stoicism because they already did what I was interested in doing; they formed an entire self-coherent system of normative statements ultimately based in intellectualism with an emphasis on normative rationality. I have no qualms about disagreeing with them on some points or rejecting them entirely if I find something better.

Hey, atheist! What do you think about me?

Specifically, about the fact that I am spiritual/religious; what do you think about that? Does that make me fearful? Foolish? Deluded? Full of myself? Any adjective with a negative connotation?

It means we probably disagree on those things, so we both think we're right and the other person is wrong. The disagreement is potentially resolvable through dialectic, where we share how we came to our conclusions in an effort to figure out which one of us is more likely to be wrong, or if we're both working with entirely different sets of information. I've sort of tired of engaging in dialectic at this point, though, so I don't really care to start that argument.

Be honest. What do you think about religious people when considering the fact that they are religious?

If all I know is that they're religious, I don't. If I know they come from an Abrahamic religion or they openly admit to being a LaVeyan Satanist, I become more cautious around them due to how Abrahamic and Satanic philosophies justify a wide variety of behaviors that are antagonistic towards me. I don't write them off completely; I just keep my guard up until I have more information about them.

What do you think about religion itself? What adjectives would you use to describe it?

Vague, meaningless, ambiguous, complicated, and controversial.

The reason I post this is because of a conversation I was having with my 100% atheist boyfriend earlier. I was explaining my elementary knowledge of Hinduism to him, and also just in general what I get out of spiritual practice. I began talking about the source of the Upanishads, the ancient sages. It is my understanding that these ancient sages discovered great truths through their practices, and this knowledge was passed down. I was explaining to him how spiritual practice can help you see the supreme reality, which is what these sages did (right?). When I said that, I thought about how that must sound to him, someone who is a man of science! I told him that what I was saying must sound rather pompous. He smiled and said that was one way of putting it, but he preferred the word "extravagant".

I can tell you how Christians tend to view atheists. When I say Christians, my frame of reference is the community I grew up in. I know it's not an encompassing representation of Christianity, but I think we all know some Christians have a superiority complex, thanks to their religion.

I was taught in church that atheists are not to be your good friends. (This held true for other groups, but focusing on atheists here). Preach to them, yes, but don't really befriend them. They are not part of the brotherhood. Atheists are in fact blind to reality. They cannot see the truth (the truth being that Jesus Christ is God). Jesus Christ's godhood is readily apparent to those possessed by the holy spirit. It is logical. So atheists are illogical. I mean, think about it. They think we literally came from monkeys. How stupid can you be? Plus, if they are not on Jesus's side, they are on the devils side. The literal devil, dude.

I know many Christians in my community who think like this. Rather, I know churches who think like this.

I'm more familiar with these kinds of Christians myself, unfortunately. However, I am aware that not all people who self-identify as Christian subscribe to these sorts of views.

Question for everybody

How do you view those who do not see the way you do?

Wrong until proven right, sort of like how courts view the accused as "innocent until proven guilty." I try to only believe in things when they have demonstrated themselves to me to be true. That doesn't mean that I'm absolutely right about everything and that I think I can never be wrong. It just means that I'm not going to change my mind until I have a good enough reason to.

I have yet to come across a good enough reason to embrace the existence of the supernatural or submit to the will of a clerical body. That doesn't mean I don't consider myself spiritual or religious, because I do consider myself both. I think I have a lot in common with people whose spirituality includes elements of the supernatural or whose religion includes elements of hierarchical organization. I just don't fully agree with them and, from my experience, most of them cannot rationally justify their positions.

 

[Hamilton]

Question for everybody

How do you view those who do not see the way you do?

I view them almost as I view myself, regarding our different Sets of Beliefs: When our bodies die, our consciouness continues. We will probably have the same fundamental beliefs after we leave our body as we had while in it. Our new circumstances will cause us to modify those beliefs.

 

[Audie]

Hey, atheist! What do you think about me?

Specifically, about the fact that I am spiritual/religious; what do you think about that? Does that make me fearful? Foolish? Deluded? Full of myself? Any adjective with a negative connotation?

Be honest. What do you think about religious people when considering the fact that they are religious?

What do you think about religion itself? What adjectives would you use to describe it?

The reason I post this is because of a conversation I was having with my 100% atheist boyfriend earlier. I was explaining my elementary knowledge of Hinduism to him, and also just in general what I get out of spiritual practice. I began talking about the source of the Upanishads, the ancient sages. It is my understanding that these ancient sages discovered great truths through their practices, and this knowledge was passed down. I was explaining to him how spiritual practice can help you see the supreme reality, which is what these sages did (right?). When I said that, I thought about how that must sound to him, someone who is a man of science! I told him that what I was saying must sound rather pompous. He smiled and said that was one way of putting it, but he preferred the word "extravagant".

I can tell you how Christians tend to view atheists. When I say Christians, my frame of reference is the community I grew up in. I know it's not an encompassing representation of Christianity, but I think we all know some Christians have a superiority complex, thanks to their religion.

I was taught in church that atheists are not to be your good friends. (This held true for other groups, but focusing on atheists here). Preach to them, yes, but don't really befriend them. They are not part of the brotherhood. Atheists are in fact blind to reality. They cannot see the truth (the truth being that Jesus Christ is God). Jesus Christ's godhood is readily apparent to those possessed by the holy spirit. It is logical. So atheists are illogical. I mean, think about it. They think we literally came from monkeys. How stupid can you be? Plus, if they are not on Jesus's side, they are on the devils side. The literal devil, dude.

I know many Christians in my community who think like this. Rather, I know churches who think like this.

Question for everybody

How do you view those who do not see the way you do? May seem like a silly question with an obvious answer "I don't see them any differently!"
But that's not true for everyone. For me, I see those who do not pursue spirituality as missing out in life. I know it's not for everyone, but, in a way, it is for everyone. I think everyone should be spiritual. I think a shift in collective consciousness towards a collective spiritual growth would be cool. Atheists could contribute to this growth more so than a believer, if they're more moral.

I don't see atheists as morally deficient or agents of the opposition or anything. I know spirituality is not for my boyfriend, I don't want to force it on him. He's a way better person than me, imo. And he's does that as an atheist, without spiritual guidance.

I believe in a greater power. It's literally there I think. So I think atheists are simply missing out on a valuable tool. But many believers can never wield the tools properly anyways, so perhaps the atheist is better off. perhaps they use the spiritual tools by virtue of their goodness.

What does "spiritual" mean

 

[an anarchist]

What does "spiritual" mean

I mean it broadly here. Someone who has any sort of magical thinking I guess. Whether it be a beleif in a soul, god, or karma.

 

[Nimos]

How do you view those who do not see the way you do?

Don't really care. As others have mentioned as well. It depends on whether their religious beliefs lead them to treat others poorly.

I'm not really against people believing in something divine or something greater than us, but I do think that some religious people are fairly quick at drawing conclusions based on what I would call dodgy evidence

You might be somewhat correct that atheists miss out on the "spiritual" thing, as I have never tried it, but I think atheists can get a similar experience in meditation or other stuff they enjoy, whether that is music, writing or simply spending time in nature, or by simply reflecting about the world. Obviously, former religious people will know if that is along the same lines or not.