The atheist bus campaign

[Cyradix]

Humans are social creatures and we all have a basic urge to be part of something.
Religion was (and still is for lot's of people) a good way to be part of something bigger then themselves.
As you have noticed in this post a lot of our generation that are no longer raised as a catholic still are rather spiritual
Be it norse gods, karma, or some other force in the universe..... people just want to believe!

 

[rynnor]

As you have noticed in this post a lot of our generation that are no longer raised as a catholic still are rather spiritual
Be it norse gods, karma, or some other force in the universe..... people just want to believe!

Spirituality is fine I just dont understand why people buy an existing religion off the shelf when they could bespoke their own ideas

 

[Wij]

*bring back deity couch*

 

[Chilly]

I'd quite happily become a pagan and do all the fun equinox and sun ceremonies. At least there you actually have something to be grateful for and a tangible thing to praise.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I know we have a few folk who like the norse gods but its pretty clear that they are derived from the earlier Greek and Roman gods as the similarities are very marked. Odin = Zeus/Jupiter. Loki=hermes. Thor = Heracles (or Hercules as hes better known) - all they did was localise the names and add new nonsense

Too much to correct there, i'll just say it's the other way around.

And if you take a look, romans didn't come to, say, finland and yet, finland has similar names as the old gods down south in greece etc.

It's quite a "co-incidence" for two races, out of contact, to come up with same/similar gods hmm? Like Tyr and Thor, both old as f*ck, but old as f*ck from VERY different locations.

But, even i don't have a "off the shelf" belief, more of a omnitist myself. Norse just has more basic "simple to explain" guidelines and has a name when someone asks about religion.

 

[DaGaffer]

Too much to correct there, i'll just say it's the other way around.

And if you take a look, romans didn't come to, say, finland and yet, finland has similar names as the old gods down south in greece etc.

It's quite a "co-incidence" for two races, out of contact, to come up with same/similar gods hmm? Like Tyr and Thor, both old as f*ck, but old as f*ck from VERY different locations.

Not really, after all Finns share language roots from the Hungarians and neither group came from those locations in the first place. Those early Eurasians got around a lot. And isn't Tyr just the Germanic Thor anyway? Same pantheon, just linguistic drift (like Thursdsay, from the same root). All evidence of human activity, not hammer-wielding nutjobs I'm afraid.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Not really, after all Finns share language roots from the Hungarians and neither group came from those locations in the first place. Those early Eurasians got around a lot. And isn't Tyr just the Germanic Thor anyway? Same pantheon, just linguistic drift (like Thursdsay, from the same root). All evidence of human activity, not hammer-wielding nutjobs I'm afraid.

If comparing migrations of the ancient greeks, romans(who stole gods from the greeks), and the northern folk, they don't overlap.

Unless, we count back eons when we were "one tribe", in which case, thor and those old fellas are ancient beyond egyptians etc :lol:

 

[chipper]

im a bit confused by the way this thread has gone. i understand ppl saying even if there was a god you wouldnt worship him etc, frankly i think any benevolent god wouldnt expect it anyway.

but how can you dismiss the exsistence of god out of hand? yes theres alot of proof to prove the bible wrong but that was written by man anyway? this is the thing about religion it can never be 100% disproven and as such even a scientist cannot flat out say s/he does not exsist. they can say its highly probable that god doesnt exsist.

as such anyone who says theres no such thing as god is a bit closed minded tbh believing in a god and worshipping one dont have to go in hand.

there may be lifeforms out there that are so advanced they may seem to be gods to us

 

[DaGaffer]

If comparing migrations of the ancient greeks, romans(who stole gods from the greeks), and the northern folk, they don't overlap.

Unless, we count back eons when we were "one tribe", in which case, thor and those old fellas are ancient beyond egyptians etc :lol:

Yeah they do. Almost all European pantheistic religions share the same roots. We all (except the Finns, Estonians, Hungarians and Basques) share the same Indo-European root language and the prototype religions almost certainly came as part of the package; especially as the first developments of written language were mainly about religion and controlled by religious elites. You can find common mythological elements all the way from the Hittites to the Irish, usually with adaptations for local conditions.

I know you'd really like old One Eye and his mates to be real and unique, but they're just another meme.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah they do. Almost all European pantheistic religions share the same roots. We all (except the Finns, Estonians, Hungarians and Basques) share the same Indo-European root language and the prototype religions almost certainly came as part of the package; especially as the first developments of written language were mainly about religion and controlled by religious elites. You can find common mythological elements all the way from the Hittites to the Irish, usually with adaptations for local conditions.

I know you'd really like old One Eye and his mates to be real and unique, but they're just another meme.

No i don't really like old one eye and his mates, just saying that the pantheon and greek gods aren't from the same wood and it's not as simple as "stole from the greeks".

And was exactly my point that the Finns have similar gods to the pantheon aswell, with similar names even, and have had them for ages. For those to come from same place, all the roots need to come from same place and as you said, they are not all from the same place.

Also, i was simply correcting the "they come from greek/roman gods" thing. Which, based on your reply, you agree with me on.

Oh and, a big reason why i believe in the norse more, is what chipper said;

"there may be lifeforms out there that are so advanced they may seem to be gods to us"

The norse gods were never omnipotent, allknowing etc(like the christian god), but were killable, fallable etc. I believe in the norse, but the word "god" doesn't mean a magical being.

 

[rynnor]

I believe in the norse, but the word "god" doesn't mean a magical being.

Well we really mean 2 things by 'god' - either A- a big omnipotent omniscient monotheistic deity

or B - a god from a pantheon of fellow gods all of which conform to the 'human plus' style - i.e. they act like humans but with greater rages/appetites and powers.

The Norse gods fit category B along with the greek/roman/babylonian/sumerian etc. etc. lets just say lots of em.

If you want to consider that the norse religion arose out of nothing then good luck to you but theres a hell of a lot of evidence against this supposition.

 

[old.Tohtori]

My idea? One of them, as there can't be just one idea about all of it.

Spaceship, aliens, act like gods, etc etc. F*ck off when humans start to worship the spaghetti monster and some loonie with a cross-fetish

Fits the eight egged horse, chariots of fire, shooting lightning etc quite well.

I think all stories, myths, religions have a base of truth in them, and norse is no exception.

 

[Will]

The eight-legged horse was an analogy to a carried body on the way to the pyre, surely?

 

[old.Tohtori]

The eight-legged horse was an analogy to a carried body on the way to the pyre, surely?

Anything can be perceived as another thing. Was simply part of the lore.

Even science could be said to be an analogy to magic.

 

[rynnor]

Even science could be said to be an analogy to magic.

Sigh - this is from the books that say 'a sufficiently advanced technology could appear as magic' but there are fundamental differences.

You sound like a Von Danikinite - Chariots of the Gods etc.

Hell if you like those ideas you should think about scientology - thats a religion about aliens...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Sigh - this is from the books that say 'a sufficiently advanced technology could appear as magic' but there are fundamental differences.

You sound like a Von Danikinite - Chariots of the Gods etc.

Hell if you like those ideas you should think about scientology - thats a religion about aliens...

It was a simple comparison, not something i "believe in". To illustrate a point. Not an attack on your precious science.

But here we go again, the "wise and educated" atheist/agnostic group forming a lynchmob.

The problem isn't religion, it's the nutters for it and the nutters AGAINST it.

Equally oblivious to their own fault as well.

You're as preachy, commanding, attacking as the religious nutters, yet it's ok 'cause it's your way.

 

[DaGaffer]

It was a simple comparison, not something i "believe in". To illustrate a point. Not an attack on your precious science.

But here we go again, the "wise and educated" atheist/agnostic group forming a lynchmob.

The problem isn't religion, it's the nutters for it and the nutters AGAINST it.

Equally oblivious to their own fault as well.

You're as preachy, commanding, attacking as the religious nutters, yet it's ok 'cause it's your way.

Ever seen an athiest suicide bomber? Or an athiest Crusader? Or an athiest inquisition? Or an atheist human sacrifice? Thought not.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Ever seen an athiest suicide bomber? Or an athiest Crusader? Or an athiest inquisition? Or an atheist human sacrifice? Thought not.

Not yet. It's too new for that.

Future with atheist bombings on churches etc isn't impossible.

And to be clear, it's nutters who murder, bomb etc for religion. Just like atheists, if the system grows, will have.

Belief system is a belief system, be it for this side of fence, be it on the fence, be it on other side of fence.

Atheism and agnostic, norse, christian, no differ, simply semantics.

 

[rynnor]

You're as preachy, commanding, attacking as the religious nutters, yet it's ok 'cause it's your way.

To preach is to seek to convert someone to a set of values or beliefs - I am not preaching merely questioning errors where I see them based on logic and observation of historic data.

Theres a whole body of Anthropological works examining the development of religions based on thousands of correlations between them.

 

[rynnor]

Belief system is a belief system, be it for this side of fence, be it on the fence, be it on other side of fence.

Atheism and agnostic, norse, christian, no differ, simply semantics.

Atheism is by definition a non-belief system so your 100% wrong.

Atheism is based on not accepting a load of old nonsense but rather looking at the world logically - all religions want you to accept their brand of baloney as the truth.

 

[old.Tohtori]

To preach is to seek to convert someone to a set of values or beliefs - I am not preaching merely questioning errors where I see them based on logic and observation of historic data.

Theres a whole body of Anthropological works examining the development of religions based on thousands of correlations between them.

Yes, but you're still preaching, telling me i should change my religion/belief, even if in a "snarky" manner, talking down about it etc.

I don't mind discussion, i do mind people being disrespectful. Even if respect isn't asked here towards my belief, some manners would be nice and some respect of fellow man.

You can't argue that you(and others) haven't been in the attacking end here.

And there's a difference in attack and "discuss and point out flaws".

Atheism is by definition a non-belief system so your 100% wrong.

Atheism is based on not accepting a load of old nonsense but rather looking at the world logically - all religions want you to accept their brand of baloney as the truth.

It's stilla "belief" system, way to live, no matter how you sugarcoat it.

The belief is the denial of all belief.

If you wanted to be a "non-belief", you wouldn't need to put yourself into some form of "union".

And by the way, religion doesn't necessarily discard logic and or science.

I for one can believe in the pantheon, as well as the big bang, and my belief in the old One Eye doesn't mean i don't believe how the scientists say the toaster works.

 

[DaGaffer]

Yes, but you're still preaching, telling me i should change my religion/belief, even if in a "snarky" manner, talking down about it etc.

I don't mind discussion, i do mind people being disrespectful. Even if respect isn't asked here towards my belief, some manners would be nice and some respect of fellow man.

You can't argue that you(and others) haven't been in the attacking end here.

And there's a difference in attack and "discuss and point out flaws".

I don't respect your views, because they don't make any sense. Sorry, you may be entitled to an opinion, but you shouldn't automatically expect respect for any view you hold. This is the problem with religious people, any debate about faith is immediately taken as an attack, because faith, by definition, can't be questioned. The minute you actually look at ANY religion logically, the whole facade just crumbles because its all "I think that, I feel this". An atheist world view is simply "on balance, with the evidence available it looks like there isn't a God".

Atheists and Agnostics are quite prepared to be proven wrong. Are you?

 

[rynnor]

I don't mind discussion, i do mind people being disrespectful. Even if respect isn't asked here towards my belief, some manners would be nice and some respect of fellow man.

You can't argue that you(and others) haven't been in the attacking end here.

And there's a difference in attack and "discuss and point out flaws".

I'm sorry if you regarded it as an attack. At no point have I been personally attacking anyone but its difficult when someone wants you to 'respect' something you think is a load of nonsense.

If a religion says its ok to subjugate women and treat them as property I'm sorry but I cannot 'respect' that just because some misogynist hundreds of years ago wrote it in a popular book.

Its not possible to point out flaws to someone in their own beliefs that they wont regard as an attack because its part of their identity and thats where it gets tricky.

I dont go around haranguing religious types to give up their faith but in a discussion like this I want to air my own views?

 

[old.Tohtori]

For both, i'm not asking for respect for my faith or hat i believe in, i'm asking for respect towards me.

For example, telling me to join Scientology is uncalled for. Telling me that you think the 8 legged horse of odin was a deadbody for the pyre, is ok.

If you question my belief, it's ok, but if you disrespect my choice to do what i want, it's a different matter.

And DaGaffer yes, i am, 100% ready to be proven wrong, but as is evident from your and other people posts, and people i've talked with, atheists and agnostics pile up ALL religions and belief systems into one scale.

Like "If a religion says its ok to subjugate women and treat them as property I'm sorry but I cannot 'respect' that" which is something i don't respect either.

I don't judge you by a single aspect of your life, let you be, never said anything about it being wrong. I might not respect that view, but i respect you enough to hold it if you want and not make jokes about it.

 

[rynnor]

For example, telling me to join Scientology is uncalled for.

Why - I put it in context - you were talking about the old aliens were our gods idea and I drew the paralell to scientology which is all about aliens?

Its your own perception of one religion being good another being bad that makes you feel insulted - I dont see much difference between them tbh.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Why - I put it in context - you were talking about the old aliens were our gods idea and I drew the paralell to scientology which is all about aliens?

Its your own perception of one religion being good another being bad that makes you feel insulted - I dont see much difference between them tbh.

I was talking about my one theory of norse mythology, you brought scientology as a clear "go join the loonie bin" point and don't even try to deny that.

 

[rynnor]

Like "If a religion says its ok to subjugate women and treat them as property I'm sorry but I cannot 'respect' that" which is something i don't respect either.

I was illustrating a fundamental point that if we 'respect' religions this kind of nonsense can go about un-challenged and we end up with a lot of crazy laws.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I was illustrating a fundamental point that if we 'respect' religions this kind of nonsense can go about un-challenged and we end up with a lot of crazy laws.

Yes, but why does it have to be "you vs us!", to the extreme. This is what i meant with zealots being the problem.

Not all religion is same, not all religion harms, not all religion is ebil, yet atheism treats them ALL the same.

Especially those who say "eradicate all religion", which, is just the same thing muslim extremists and the crusades were about.

 

[rynnor]

I was talking about my one theory of norse mythology, you brought scientology as a clear "go join the loonie bin" point and don't even try to deny that.

No - I actually used it because its the only other space based religion I know of and its one people have heard of - I doubt most people who hate scientology know a damn thing about it?

I dont see the difference between a religion where a bloke sat down recently and wrote it and one where a bloke sat down hundreds of years ago and wrote it?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Then i guess it's just your natural way to say things with very little concern as:

Hell if you like those ideas you should think about scientology - thats a religion about aliens...

would have been a lot mroe easy to take in if it was said as you explained it was meant:

"Scientology has similar principles, i don't think they are any more plausible/are more plausible" etc.

But what you said is equal to:

"Hell, why don't you just go fuck a tree...they don't believe either".

See?