The Athiest-MPS Link's Destruction of Spirituality

Some atheist are really satanist using atheism as a cover, when you get atheist fighting against crosses, bible versus, etc. it means they have other intentions. Atheist do not believe in God, the bible should more like philosophy for them. This goes deeper, maybe even radical islamic doing the same but I view radical islamics as devil worshippers. We must continue to fight people trying to shove their beliefs onto us.

Science is known knowledge from what we understand. Proven in ways understood.

It is not unknown knowledge.

As a "true" atheist should also claim agnostic. As in agnostic atheist.

God can not be proven or unproven from what we know and how we know it.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Without man there is no science. So shouldn't science be interested in
everything that man is? Even in his spirituality? But this isn't the case
at all. Thus science ceases to be science by it's lack of interest in regards
to anything that isn't materialistic. Science should be 100% interested in
the concept and origins of mankinds spiritual beliefs. Not just write them
off as fairytales.

originally posted by: Hecate666
OP, as someone who doesn't believe in any manmade gods and who is/ was a scientist, I can't get my head around your post.

First of all, being an Atheist is not a label I even give to myself because Atheism is the base standard when you are born. We are all born as Atheists and then some adults come along and teach us whatever they deem acceptable.

I am not to keen on that label. If you call yourself a christian or a muslim, yeah because you chose that belief but Atheist is a term given to us 'natural' people by believers. I am nothing but a human.

I agree, it is unfortunate anybody is FORCED to self-label. It is, however, NECESSARY when engaging in an intellectual discussion as is this thread. Please keep that in mind.

Anyway. My biggest gripe about the post is that Atheism and spirituality can't go together.

What a load of crock. I would go as far as to say that it is impossible to become properly spiritual as long as you are caught within religious boundaries as you are stopped from thinking further.

I was expecting your reaction, so I won't shut you down or be aggressive, I will simply clarify what the OP means because there is a good chance you have misunderstood a portion of it.

I am aware of one other member on this board that identifies as an atheist and spiritual. She has made the claim in the past that Buddhism is an atheistic religion, which I have a feeling you might be going with. I don't agree with THAT claim, so I won't comment further until confirm you agree with that claim. Let me read the rest of your post before I go any further.

I am one of the most spiritual people you could meet, I am spiritual, what you call an Atheist and a scientist! [Shock]

All fits in really snug in my life and I have reached a point of a great understanding about life, the universe and a lot of other things.

I don't recall making the claim or implying that being an atheist, a scientist and being spiritual was an unreasonable combination to be. If I did, can you please show me why you think I have done that?

As to militant scientists. If they refuse to open their minds to spirituality, then they are no scientists as they have no understanding of what science means. Spirituality is still somewhere explainable by science. Everything is if it exists.

I use the word 'militant' in "pro-science militants" (not to be confused with the term "militant atheist" and how that is used), to demonstrate that their faith in the scientific authority is unhealthy and detrimental to their use of reason in unknowable topics of discussion.

How you can use THOSE people to change your entire belief system shows me that you have a long way to go to find YOUR true self.

You must base your inner journey not on outside groups of people but where your inner self takes you.
Don't care about idiots, they have their own life journey. You have yours.

I don't intend to change anybody's belief system, I certainly don't consciously want to. I want to encourage people to think, think deeply about how they use the words they do and ensure what they say IS matching what they are intending to say. It is not easy, it is not something you can change in 1 year. I have been trying to do it for over 8 years while being a member on this site and I STILL manage to misinterpret what people are saying. I am MUCH better at not misrepresenting their argument, my strides in that department has improved drastically. However, there is still work to do and I am doing it because the "examined life is not worth living" — one of the most significant quotes EVER recorded in terms of how many words are used and the power and change those words have effected.

I don't consider them idiots (assuming you mean "spiritually dumb", whereas I view it as meaning the traditionally "intellectually stupid") maybe that is where you and I differ. If you mean idiots because they are not worthy of any else's time except themselves or people who are the same, then I don't disagree...but I don't think its as "beyond hope" as you are implying.

If I were to say to you "I, Dark Ghost, would LOVE to have conversation with Richard Dawkins and clarify whether he is actually an atheist or not", pro-science militants would probably scoff, not believing that I would have the audacity, the arrogance, the gall to even suggest I am worthy of an email response from Dawkins. What he has accomplished, what he has gone through, what he has achieved...why would he want to even sit down and listen to my questions? Well, my response would be "I do not claim to be nearly as decorated or successful or famous or intelligent or influential as he probably is in his own town than I am outside even this website. I do believe I have noticed an inconsistency in the views he has described and have the opportunity to perhaps make him see another alternative." (laughter ensues). Do you see how such a claim makes me seem to feel so entitled, so correct, so knowledgeable and confident in my own beliefs that I could consider it a realistic possibility of meeting him one day. Why would I even want to meet him anyway?

The reason is I don't value Richard Dawkins for his views on evolution, biology or anything else, I admire his profoundly deep thinking capabilities in regard to how he looks at the world around him and why he believes what he does. I wouldn't spend a second speaking to him about evolution or biology (even though his knowledge of both is incredible) because I don't have an interest to be knowledgeable in those fields. I would go straight to his claims to be an atheist AFTER I put into context who I am, what I believe and my general position on topics he is famous for discussing.

Sorry, I was in dream land for a minute, I'm back now.

The popular rebuttal to me admitting that would be "if somebody else's belief system cannot be changed, why bother changing it if you won't be successful? Just let them keep believing what they do until they realise they are wrong and hopefully then they will join

Hehe, I predicted that would be a popular response, look at my reply higher up.

Most the religion bashing ones I've meet I think where secretaly working for religion

I've yet to meet a atheist in real life not online that is out to kill religion

So my logical conclusion is it's fake ... some may be real but bs that makes atheist look bad and gives the church something to fight against

originally posted by: Justso
1. No-spirituality has no definition unless you are a religious sort.
2. Never said existence of a God is knowable-it isn't-as far as I know.
3. Nope-didn't read it-or understand what you are saying.
4. Disagree-your opinion-no way you can prove that-the times they are a-changin.

1. Incorrect. Spirituality can be defined without what you call people of a "religious sort" (I believe you mean Western religious fundamentalists?). Spirituality is often misused to mean "religion-based", when it is not actually referring to the same thing. If you don't believe me go look it up in a dictionary.

In regard to my question that prompted your response: when I said "name" I didn't mean a definition OR my own as you seem to have taken it. I meant would YOU (if we were to compromise so we can better understand each other) use the word "spirituality" as meaning unknowable so you could relate to it as a concept we can both understand.

2. I'm still honestly confused on what point you were making in the previous reply. I don't know what else I can ask without making assumptions that don't appear to be warranted at this time.

3. Please do read it if you can, I feel it is a MUCH easier way of explaining what I am referring to. Not just because it took long but also because it is likely to be beneficial for YOU if you are unclear about my overall point.

4. Yes it is my opinion based on my experiences with people and media inside the country I am in. I do often use "Western countries" to simplify what I am discussing, even though there is MUCH diversity in culture between many Western countries. I am not from the USA. In my country (Australia), the acceptance of science over religion (in most areas) might be far more prevalent than it is where you are (I assume the USA?) I do have relatives in the USA and I have been to the USA when I was younger, and I cannot relate to what you are saying.

Your op, while interesting-reads like a parable-going round and round-I may have missed some of your concepts but did the best I could.

Thank you. I really do appreciate you taking the time to ask and get clarification of my views without thinking "oh he just a religious idiot" or "he just does't understand science". All I want is the opportunity to express my views so that they are understood in the way I mean to express them. (I still have work to do expressing them correctly, but I am trying every day I can). I don't expect that means to everyone on ATS, or even those interested in this topic especially. Just ask for clarification whenever you feel the need. I cannot do that to EVERY other member for each of their replies and I don't have unlimited time or energy, but I will try and do the best I can.

I totally agree that Science tells you things that
they would like you to take on blind faith.

Like dark mater!
they make up things to Fit what they think and say.
and Like Many other things they get wrong.
after time we ALL just forget it.

95% of people just forget the bad things in life.
like all the bad obama did. no one care or thinks about it.
I wounder if people think Life is a TV sitcom.

A Great jog brain washing the people TPTB.

a reply to: markovian

Please read my opening post in full again, if you have not done so already. I really do feel all of your comments can be explained if you do, If not, then I will clarify but please do that first.

The time is now 1:15am on 30/04/2017 where I am. I am heading off to bed and will be back tomorrow to see if anybody else replies to this thread. I do hope people already doing so continue to read and if other new people join in, that would be great too. I don't know when I will be back, but most likely the late morning/afternoon my time. So please don't think I am ignoring this thread or anyone on it if I don't reply (in what might seem like) in ages.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

I think you will find "reasonable" positions are boring so the loudmouthsooner get the mic.

I had this discussion last night with my son. We actually talked about how often celebrity type scientists like to debate really ignorant creationists and act like they can easily disprove "god". Dawkins is really bad at doing this, when a Christian philosopher challenged him to a debate he declined, probably knowing it wouldn't be easy to debate an apologist with philosophical training.

Hard atheism is very close to theism. Once you make a claim god doesn't exist your into beliefs again.

I think often atheists can be scarred former religious folks so you get the "reverse racism" effect. They are just being freed from a belief that possible torchered their inner conscious for years. So the reaction is antitheism.

Real scientists are pretty open to being wrong. Making claims about god falls into philosophy and just barely touches into physical cosmology. Science don't real care about proving god for the most part.

a reply to: randyvs

Without man there is no science. So shouldn't science be interested in everything that man is? Even in his spirituality? But this isn't the case at all.

Science acknowledges its limits; what cannot be reliably and repeatedly observed and recorded is outside its sphere. The scientific method needs solid data to work on; if there isn't any, science is lost.

Some people think this means science denies spirituality. It does not, although many scientists and scientific materialists do. But there is nothing in science that demands this.

a reply to: Astyanax

Science acknowledges its limits; what cannot be reliably and repeatedly observed and recorded is outside its sphere. The scientific method needs solid data to work on; if there isn't any, science is lost. Some people think this means science denies spirituality. It does not, although many scientists and scientific materialists do. But there is nothing in science that demands this.

Yeah, it may seem as tho I believe there's some cabal in the scientific
community conspiring against mankinds inner being. If that were the
case at all I'm sure it's an influence outside of it.The protocols of science
are strict so I understand the why in that regard. Any way I agree with you.
I just wish there was a way for science to be more involved I guess and less
negative towards the subject.

Man Dark Ghost, it appears to you have poked the hornets nest. Sweet.

I always thought the true atheists were just as religious as the followers of the abrahamic religions. From my point of view, they claim knowledge, definitive knowledge that there is NOT a god. That we are just a biomass of electronic signals and once those signals stop, we are done. Nothing after, no soul, no spirit and nothing that survives death.

Agnostics simply claim they have no clue. There is no evidence that supports or denies the existence of a god. That there is veil between this world and the next that will prevent spiritual/physical knowledge.

But I wonder what drives the urge of belief for a lot of the religious? Could it be that the majority of people actually experience the spiritual. That religion satisfies that mystery and they no longer have to search for answers?

I like what another poster stated, spirituality can be completely separate from religion.

Maybe like the yin yang we are a combination of both the physical and spiritual.

originally posted by: ClovenSky
Man Dark Ghost, it appears to you have poked the hornets nest. Sweet.

I doubt it, most of the people that need to try to understand what I am saying don''t want to even try. I can very much to relate to the inability to even try because I even experienced it when I was mentally unwell (major depressive disorder) in the past. If I felt something was hard, ANYTHING above the absolute bare minimum, I would talk my self out of doing it and use my condition as the justification for doing so. I could go in to how bad it was...you would laugh, believe me...but it won't help.

I always thought the true atheists were just as religious as the followers of the abrahamic religions. From my point of view, they claim knowledge, definitive knowledge that there is NOT a god. That we are just a biomass of electronic signals and once those signals stop, we are done. Nothing after, no soul, no spirit and nothing that survives death.

Do remember that atheist does just refer to a lack of belief in a deity or deities. I truly believe most atheists don't feel hard claims like "all religion is fiction" or "god does not exist, how could he? you are dumb if you STILL believe that!" is true, they usually say it out of desperation because of the constant hounding and ridicule they suffer JUST because it is know they lack a belief in God. Some do take it too far and unfairly use their identity as atheists for bad reasons.

Agnostics simply claim they have no clue. There is no evidence that supports or denies the existence of a god. That there is veil between this world and the next that will prevent spiritual/physical knowledge.

I don't know if that's entirely as simple as you state. I am certainly aware there are things I as a human cannot understand directly. Anything and everything I say or think CAN be related to by myself. I cannot directly confirm ANYTHING in THAT way when I examine anything outside my mind. Even my hand. I see them moving and I can feel them moving, but I cannot be certain they are one and the same as what is going up in my mind.

But I wonder what drives the urge of belief for a lot of the religious? Could it be that the majority of people actually experience the spiritual. That religion satisfies that mystery and they no longer have to search for answers?[/quote
Perhaps so, that is a reasonable assumption for many of them, not all of course. Anyway, I personally cannot stop searching because my life is not worthy to live unless I am consistently examining it. (A paraphrase of an ancient philosopher's quote).

I like what another poster stated, spirituality can be completely separate from religion.

Spirituality an aspect of religion. Unfortunately, most people who are adherents of a monotheistic religion believe organisation of their religion is more important than the spirituality part.

[v]Maybe like the yin yang we are a combination of both the physical and spiritual.

Perhaps we are.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

So, if there is a group of people trying to get rid of spirituality, what ate they trying to accomplish? Are they just an extension of those who try to rule over us all? I had always thought that the greatest method of control they had was through organized religion. Are they starting to see that structure fail in today's world? Are they trying to replace it with 'nothing but the physical exists'?

What is your view of the spiritual? Can it be projected? Are feelings and thoughts tied into this medium? Can it be felt when sourced from others?

Sorry for the questions, I do not encounter people willing to talk about this much. Almost like it is taboo.

a reply to: ClovenSky

So, if there is a group of people trying to get rid of spirituality, what ate they trying to accomplish?

There is no such group, but if there were, their intent would be to sieze the levers of belief and loyalty on behalf of a rival narrative of their own. The Nazis did this in Germany; the Communists did it in many countries.

originally posted by: Annee
Science is known knowledge from what we understand. Proven in ways understood.

It is not unknown knowledge.

As a "true" atheist should also claim agnostic. As in agnostic atheist.

God can not be proven or unproven from what we know and how we know it.

This is actually not correct.
When you seek a true relationship with God, he can and does reveal himself to those who seek him and love him. He doesn't reveal himself only to prove he is real though, he reveals himself because people seek him and love him and he responds with love just as those who seek him also love him.

But those who reject God and are unwilling to believe or seek him, will never know this.

I mean no disrespect here and I wish you well.

I feel like after reading the op that you are an individual torn apart by what you think you should believe. You seem to feel like you can't fit in or relate to any one of the "situations" in which you detail.

As a person that does not believe in any faith, religion, or god, I too spent many years twisted in what I thought I should believe. Instead I have come to the conclusion that inner peace only comes after you realize that only you can focus on you. To not worry about who believes what or what "they" think of you for being you.

You seem to worry too much about others beliefs and system rules.

Just let it go. Believe what you believe and go get some fresh air.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

A good way to understand this topic is to imagine a pendulum swing, on one side of the swing are strongly religious people, on the other side of the swing are strongly atheist people. Without realising it they are often one and the same, they are both groups of people with strong belief systems about the world around them. They will both fight their corners in an ignorant and arrogant manor using false logic to defend their position.

The middle ground of the swing is the realm of agnostic people, we look for evidence without denying the possibility that each side may have something to contribute.

In my personal experience atheism is born largely out of egotism. Atheists believe that they are more intelligent than religious people and scoff at ideas of spirituality and anything that is beyond their current understanding. Yet without realising it they have chosen to be a part of the most useless and intolerant of all religions, their belief system provides no benefit to themselves, people around them or society as a whole. Even science can suffer at the hands of an atheist. Hence the only real benefit being egotistical satisfaction.

originally posted by: Catcolouredpaint
a reply to: Dark Ghost

A good way to understand this topic is to imagine a pendulum swing, on one side of the swing are strongly religious people, on the other side of the swing are strongly atheist people. Without realising it they are often one and the same, they are both groups of people with strong belief systems about the world around them. They will both fight their corners in an ignorant and arrogant manor using false logic to defend their position.

The middle ground of the swing is the realm of agnostic people, we look for evidence without denying the possibility that each side may have something to contribute.

In my personal experience atheism is born largely out of egotism. Atheists believe that they are more intelligent than religious people and scoff at ideas of spirituality and anything that is beyond their current understanding. Yet without realising it they have chosen to be a part of the most useless and intolerant of all religions, their belief system provides no benefit to themselves, people around them or society as a whole. Even science can suffer at the hands of an atheist. Hence the only real benefit being egotistical satisfaction.

I think you don't understand what atheists are. We are not people with a belief system, we are people who do not believe the claims of those people who say that gods exist. Those people try to use their unsubstantiated claims to tell other people how they should live their lives. We ask for demonstrable proof for these claims and there is never anything presented. At some point you stop asking for the proof and start pointing out that there is none.

That is all the word atheist entails. That we don't believe the claims of theists. The word atheist does not describe any of the beliefs that an atheist might have. There are other words that describe those things.

Do you know why there are no aunicornists? Because there are no groups out there who are pushing for the belief of unicorns.