To
michel:
I use the term antichrist for the sole purpose of convenient labeling. It's my opinion that there is not enough proof that Jesus Christ existed, or at least none at all that he was divine and miraculous. This in mind, I'm not against Christ any more than I am against Santa Claus. What I am against is the Christian teachings, which
do have good but not in a way that I can support as a freethinker. Destroying people's illusions, a good thing or a bad thing? My father, a Christian, once asked me why I was so vocal about my beliefs. Why I tried to convince people otherwise. He said, "What if there IS a God and anyone you convert ends up suffering forever? They have everything to gain and nothing to lose, why interfere."
My dad is a recovering coke addict, so I rephrased his questions
. My answer now, after having developed my ideas, is to return a question: Is it better to live a lie and be happy or to take a chance and discover the truth? I'm always being scolded for using the Matrix as an analogy, my friends say I base my opinions on it, "It's just a movie" they say. Actually, the Matrix just helped me define my reasons like any other media or book can. So, instead, the Matrix is based on MY (and the people like me's) opinions.
Neo (an antichrist) wants to free people (theists) from a the Matrix (a lie) even though they are perfectly happy living there.. so long as they don't know.
"Ignorance is bliss," said Cypher. That's too true. Look at the Matrix, can Neo justify his actions to destroy the Matrix? Humans are enslaved, but they're happy not knowing about it. Weighing values, what is more important-- happiness or freedom? At the end of the third movie, the Architect and the Oracle met halfway with Neo's request agreeing to free anyone who wanted to be free. If it weren't for freedom fighters like Neo, these people would never have had that choice. I'm here to present an alternate argument, an alternate possibility that's nothing new. The chance of me helping people make a choice is much higher if I voice my opinions publicly.
Furthermore, about my being antichrist (more accurately antitheism) the Christian bible defines an antichrist in 2 John, Chapter 1, Verse 7.
"Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist."
I don't consider myself a deceiver, but antichrist is a fitting term by Christian standards.
Homophobia being a byproduct of fear rather than intolerant religionists, half-right. They go hand-in-hand. On one side of the track, the fearful will use the traditional definition of a marriage without bringing God into the equation. On the other side, the religious will use biblical verses and have picket signs that say, "Repent F*gs!" Not understanding leads to fear, agreed, does fear lead to religion?
I understand I might be offensive, and that you're an administrator. I would like to be part of the gang, and I think I'm keeping it friendly. I've not resorted to flaming anyone and all my arguments are logical and relevant.. this place has been very tolerant of my heretical teachings!
Adolf Hitler against abortion was just an analogy and not a serious question.. meaning a few good things can't compensate for an overabundance of bad things.
I also agree that the news is centered on the negatives. Ratings are more important than telling the truth, sadly. I don't watch the news religiously or to get a generally accurate picture of society. I use history for this.
"Do unto others.." I abbreviated the entire saying. Your moral code is my moral code. I'm not going to kill anyone, or rape anyone, because I don't want to. Not out of fear of being punished. Further, I'll donate to charity, not for want of reward but for personal satisfaction. This is what theists do, but by doing it in the name of God they are typically overshadowing their personal reasons.
Regarding
Hitler's religon:
He might not have been Christian, but he believed in a personal god. On each Nazi belt was the phrase, "God With Us!" in German (Gott Mittuns, if I remember correctly). Friedrich Nietzsche predicted the coming of the superman. The superman would be the antichrist (destroyer of fear) and the antinihilist (destroyer of insignifance).. to bring humanity to a middle ground where a pure understanding could be attained. Hitler was insane, but his ideas were not.. please don't call me neo-Nazi. I'm not in favor of genocide. But I'm a proponent of evolution and to me it is entirely possible, in fact inevitable, that a branch of human beings will/would/already has evolve(d) faster than others because of natural selection. Call me racist, but it was the Nordics who first industrialized because they had the resources and the means. South Africans are still living basic lives except where the Nordic tribes have influenced. I'm neutral, and not saying blacks are lesser than whites. Please don't think that, but as a realist and evolutionist I don't see how we can deny the certain environmental advantages that the Nordics had over the Africans. Nevermind this, it might become a racist debate. I'm only saying that Hitler wasn't entirely wrong, just insane.
Oh, now I'm worried of what you all may think.
To
TheJedi:
Science has done good things, and bad things. Scientists with good intentions often have their creations turned into something evil, like the creator of dynamite which was meant to help (.. the creation of train tunnels through mountains? Hazy) but it turned out to have military applications. Einstein didn't know what he was getting into when he created the atomic bomb. He wrote a letter to the current president begging for him not to use it and was ignored.
Science can be used for good and bad. Just like religion, but at least with science we have change and progress and an improvement in the standard of living. To get these benefits, we pay the costs. I can't think of an example when religion has given us any real benefit other than hope and good dreams.. and these don't extend our lifespans or sterilize surgical tools or help psychiatrists decide which medication would be best.
Can I use Tom Cruise as an example, pardon me for stereotyping but it holds for my point. Tom Cruise believes mental illnesses like PPD can be cured with a good diet and exercise. He's uneducated on psychiatry and the workings of the brain, yet his "theory" is going to be trusted by Tom Cruise fans! Would you rather believe a big-named Tom Cruise, or a psychiatrist you never heard of? Sensibly, you'll go for credibility. But, there are people who will shut the eye of reason and believe in Cruise.
I think we should all abandon our cars and ride bikes, or utilize mass transportation. I keep remembering the radio ad on GTA: San Andreas where the guy says, "Remember, mass transportation is a small step towards communism." The radio on that game is hilarious. The movie
I <3 Huckabees talks about our petroleum fixation as well. Like science, there are downsides and upsides to using petroleum. But, without science, we wouldn't even be talking about them.
To
Jayhawker Soule:
I'm very interested in philosophy and metaphysics, which depend upon logic and reasoning. This separates philosophy from religion, which depends upon blind faith and questionless authority. I support philosophy to explore principles like morality and existence.. as philosophy can only help us understand ourselves better, religion is about strict rules and the dismissal of alternate viewpoints. Personally, I'm working for an English major and a Philosophy minor, and know that not everyone can be a philosopher.
I've been presenting arguments and evidence throughout the entire thread. I use quotes from authority figures to strengthen my point. I don't believe in something just because someone says so, but I'll consider believing in something if a SMART someone says so. Logically, if all these intelligent philosophers and scientists came up with the conclusion.. they must be on the right track? They're a guide, just like the Bible.
To
Darkdale:
Even michel brought to point that hatred comes from lack of understanding. Some religions (and non-religions) generally tend to seek more understanding than other notable religions. Some religions present a bottom line-- do this or you're evil. Others are more flexible. You'll find statistics saying that nearly 98% of convicted felons are Christians, with very few atheists (granted the idea of being Born Again, which is a silly way of being forgiven for raping or killing someone). Can anyone name for me a war started by atheists, for atheist causes? Clearly, wars are started for personal interests and monetary benefits. Those in power like to say, "It's the right thing to do" to win public favor, but the vast majority of the time they just want oil. Some wars are justified when it comes to defending the nation.. I don't see a problem with moving into North Korea and disabling their nuclear weapons program, for example (ignore the consequences and great wars that would come from this, it's just an example).
So many wars and crusades and inquisitions in the name of God. When's the last time a group of atheists got together, armed themselves, and went to war with Christians, or Buddhists, or Muslims, or Taoists, or Jedis! Atheism promotes peace (with few exceptions), religion promotes barriers (with few exceptions).
To
all:
Maybe there's nothing wrong with being offensive.. if what you say is valid. I might discover that the human body can live NO LONGER than the constant integer of 135 and if and when they reach their 135th birthday they will drop dead, I can say this beyond a doubt (just an example, not serious). Of course I'm going to upset people.
