| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gary DeWaay" |
| Date: |
05 Nov 2004 11:50:38 AM |
| Object: |
An atheist church? |
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
I would discuss my views pertaining to my faith, and discuss the myths of
the bible, and I'd pass the plate and take donations that would cover the
expenses of the church and my salary, same as any church.
What are the laws for a church to be recognized?
Pardon if this has been discussed before.
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 08:47:46 AM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
Ok, this is where you start losing me. Only an insane person would think
there is an invisible mouse in a box. There are a lot of reasons to
wonder if there is an invisible god or not. The entire world around us
and the amazing intelligence of humans makes one wonder if there was a
supreme being that started this... isn't such a thing perfectly natural?
Why?
The only people who seem to come up with that are those conditioned
to believe as children.
Well, except for just about every civilization in history, this is true.
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Nutter" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 09:47:15 AM |
|
|
In article <MPG.1bfa9492a9be9d88989af7@news.midco.net>,
Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
The only people who seem to come up with that are those conditioned
to believe as children.
Well, except for just about every civilization in history, this is true.
Interestingly, though, the beliefs they come up with vary quite a bit.
The Judeo-Christian God is just a special case of beings known as gods,
and gods are just special cases of invisible magical beings that are
supposedly responsible for the natural phenomena that people observe but
do not understand. So you could say that just about every civilization
in history--including small-scale tribal communities--come up with the
idea that invisible magical spirits are behind the phenomena that people
see and do not understand. In some special cases they call these beings
"gods," and in some of these special cases, they call just one of these
beings "God" (and make the rest of them angels or demons or what have
you).
If you look at it that way, you can see that there is another
alternative to the idea that all societies reflect a common experience
of a common (Judeo-Christian) Creator God. Maybe it's not God we all
have in common, but ignorance. Superstition is what happens when people
feel compelled to give authoritative explanations for things they
themselves do not understand. That's what all civilizations have in
common.
But then again, some special cases tend to be more successful, in terms
of attracting converts and believers, than other belief systems are.
Sometimes, they're more successful popularity-wise than even more
reliable systems of knowledge, like science. It is interesting to
consider why that is so--but that's a whole 'nuther topic in itself. ;)
Mark Nutter
manutter51@alethian.org
http://www.alethian.org/ -- Information about Alethea, the God all
societies have in common, and about Alethian faith and practice.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 09:48:30 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 08:47:46 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
Ok, this is where you start losing me. Only an insane person would think
there is an invisible mouse in a box. There are a lot of reasons to
wonder if there is an invisible god or not. The entire world around us
and the amazing intelligence of humans makes one wonder if there was a
supreme being that started this... isn't such a thing perfectly natural?
Why?
The only people who seem to come up with that are those conditioned
to believe as children.
Well, except for just about every civilization in history, this is true.
Nope.
But thank you for confiming what I said.
A whole slew of atheists here didn't have that conditioning. And it
never occurred to them to wonder that.
Treat it as an abstract logic problem.
How would one ever come up with it to wonder it?
In a vacuum.
It is a non-sequitur.
But in any case, plenty of atheists, especially outside the parochial
USA, were not raised as theists.
It comes as a shock to them when they are expected to "conclude" it.
Because it does not follow.
The only reason to "wonder that" is because the belief was implanted
before in the formative years before the child learned to think for
him/herself.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 06:38:56 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 22:14:13 -0600, Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net>
wrote:
Ok, this is where you start losing me. Only an insane person would think
there is an invisible mouse in a box.
Agreed, but irrelevant.
You still cannot prove that it is not there.
Therefore, by your own reasoning, you may not dismiss the possibility that it is
there.
There are a lot of reasons to
wonder if there is an invisible god or not.
I have never found one, and I am reasonably well traveled, passably well
educated, and, I suspect, just a smidgen older than you.
The entire world around us
and the amazing intelligence of humans makes one wonder if there was a
supreme being that started this... isn't such a thing perfectly natural?
I have no doubts about the existence of leprechauns, Santa and an
invisible mouse. I do have doubts about god. I choose to remain
skeptical because there is no PROOF either way. This seems the most
logical conclusion.
If atheists are going to stick to the Santa and invisible mouse
comparisons, I don't think you are going to sway too many people.
Just my opinion.
I don't see how this can be, and I don't see why atheists here get their
underwear in a bunch about it.
Mostly, we get tired of explaining the same old things to the same old deaf
ears, and dead brains.
You seem to be indicating there is a Christian
God that is being denied.
No, I am saying there is no proof either way.
And suggesting that because there is no "proof" of non-existence, we should
assume that such does exist.
You can't disprove my mouse, either.
Does my mouse exist?
Is there any objectively verifiable event, in human experience, that suggests
that my mouse is a possibility?
I am not going get into an argument over lack
of belief is a belief, lack of faith is faith.
It is obvious this makes atheists uncomfortable.
Are you now stating that you are not an atheist?
I wish you would make up your mind.
Apparently some people here think I am, and others, like you, think I am a
theist, and others just call me names.
I'm not sure what I would label myself at this point.
Does anyone know why? And please, if you think I am theist and planning a
sneak attack here, Google up something I wrote called "My Sunday Morning
Sermon".
A young lady came in here, some years ago, and a more vitriolic, atheist, it
would be hard to imagine. Her whole attitude towards xtians, was an
embarrassment, even to atheists.
Doesn't Christopher Lee's behaviour embarrass anyone?
Your Sunday Morning Sermon, would have cut no ice with her, and it wouldn't even
scratch the surface of her apparent atheism.
Thank you for at least taking the time to read it.
She disappeared for six month, and when she came back, she was just as
unpleasant as ever, but now she had, had a miraculous conversion, and was a born
again xtian.
By comparison, your little assertion is a zephyr, beside a hurricane.
I assume this means you are now going to start calling me a theist again.
Tell you what. Email Georgann and ask her if I am anything close to a
theist... she'll get a kick out of that. We go way back.
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
08 Nov 2004 05:01:49 PM |
|
|
Gary DeWaay wrote:
Fatman's wisdom:
Gary DeWaay wrote:
snip
I would discuss my views pertaining to my faith, and discuss the
myths of the bible,
Why? If so, why just the bible? Why not all the other *****
religous writtings out there?
Because it is so popular here?
With you, perhaps, but we simply get it thrust upon us, by people like you.
People who seem to thing that because we get ***** with idiots preaching at
us, in our own NGs, and fight back, we must be enjoying it, or it must fill all
our waking thoughts.
There are far more interesting mythologies, than yours.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
05 Nov 2004 12:13:53 PM |
|
|
Gary DeWaay wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
I would discuss my views pertaining to my faith, and discuss the myths of
the bible, and I'd pass the plate and take donations that would cover the
expenses of the church and my salary, same as any church.
What are the laws for a church to be recognized?
Pardon if this has been discussed before.
It is already done. The Unitarian Universalist Association has many members
who are "less than theist", and UU services tend towards being non-religious,
humanist lectures and discussion. There are also a number of Freethought
churches which are largely atheist in doctrine.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in
the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary,
self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition
of tyranny." - James Madison, _The Federalist_, #47
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Nutter" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
05 Nov 2004 01:51:32 PM |
|
|
In article <MPG.1bf57968678a2d66989ac2@news.midco.net>,
Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
I would discuss my views pertaining to my faith, and discuss the myths of
the bible, and I'd pass the plate and take donations that would cover the
expenses of the church and my salary, same as any church.
What are the laws for a church to be recognized?
Pardon if this has been discussed before.
You might be interested in checking out www.alethian.org, even though
it's not atheistic, contrary to my original intention. I've come to the
conclusion that there are psychosocial forces that make a godless church
unlikely to compete successfully against theistic religions, and I've
found a pantheistic alternative that identifies God with Reality itself.
From an atheistic perspective, it makes sense because it takes the Real
World as its infallible standard of truth--no supernatural,
superstitious mumbo-jumbo needed or wanted. From a theistic
perspective, it's a natural extension of (and correction for) the
primitive theologies of the past--a bigger, more comprehensive, and
immediate view of that which is bigger than ourselves.
Let me know if this rings a bell with you at all. I think our society
really needs a new religion based on reality as Infallible Truth, and
I'd like to get some input and support from others.
Mark Nutter
manutter51@alethian.org
http://www.alethian.org/ -- Information about Alethea, the God who is
Reality itself, and about Alethian faith and practice.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Canzi -- non-mailable address" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
05 Nov 2004 07:39:47 PM |
|
|
In article <MPG.1bf57968678a2d66989ac2@news.midco.net>,
Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism?
DeWaay International?
--
David Canzi
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Beowulf" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
05 Nov 2004 12:02:34 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
...
The object of "faith" would be faith in human potential rather than a
male sky-god. Seems doable to me!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
05 Nov 2004 10:47:54 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> said in alt.atheism:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism?
How does one "practice" atheism.
"Now we stand and don't pray"?
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Faith in? Reality?
--
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They slander each
other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and cannot come to any sort of
agreement in their teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its own
with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its
side."
- Celsus On the True Doctrine, translated by R. Joseph Hoffman, Oxford University Press, 1987
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
07 Nov 2004 07:37:35 PM |
|
|
Al Klein's wisdom:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism?
How does one "practice" atheism.
"Now we stand and don't pray"?
Many people that aren't believers have a lot of questions. I'd assume it
would teach people that it is alright to not believe in any sky gods.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Faith in? Reality?
Sure.
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
07 Nov 2004 09:04:30 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:37:35 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein's wisdom:
How does one "practice" atheism.
"Now we stand and don't pray"?
Many people that aren't believers have a lot of questions. I'd assume it
would teach people that it is alright to not believe in any sky gods.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs a lot more than someone
saying "it's all right".
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Faith in? Reality?
Sure.
If there's no one standing next to you it doesn't take faith to not
believe that there's someone there - all it takes is sanity.
--
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They slander each
other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and cannot come to any sort of
agreement in their teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its own
with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its
side."
- Celsus On the True Doctrine, translated by R. Joseph Hoffman, Oxford University Press, 1987
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
07 Nov 2004 09:28:44 PM |
|
|
Al Klein's wisdom:
Many people that aren't believers have a lot of questions. I'd assume it
would teach people that it is alright to not believe in any sky gods.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs a lot more than someone
saying "it's all right".
So basically all atheists think that everyone is insane, and shouldn't
need any help sorting things out? Is this the consensus here?
I disagree.
I think there might be a lot of people that need reassurance that it's ok
to not believe in god.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Faith in? Reality?
Sure.
If there's no one standing next to you it doesn't take faith to not
believe that there's someone there - all it takes is sanity.
A person is something physical. God is not physical, thus it is
impossible to disprove.
It takes faith.
Now that I think about it, it does take faith that Santa does not exist.
Why is it so important for an atheist to not be associated with faith?
Serious question.
Gary
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 07:28:14 AM |
|
|
"Gary DeWaay" <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1bf8a3d9308bcfaa989acf@news.midco.net...
Al Klein's wisdom:
Many people that aren't believers have a lot of questions. I'd assume
it
would teach people that it is alright to not believe in any sky gods.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs a lot more than someone
saying "it's all right".
So basically all atheists think that everyone is insane, and shouldn't
need any help sorting things out? Is this the consensus here?
Nope.
--
---------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
08 Nov 2004 10:08:08 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 21:28:44 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> said in alt.atheism:
If there's no one standing next to you it doesn't take faith to not
believe that there's someone there - all it takes is sanity.
A person is something physical. God is not physical, thus it is
impossible to disprove.
It doesn't need disproof, it needs PROOF. Barring that there's
nothing to have faith IN.
Why is it so important for an atheist to not be associated with faith?
Serious question.
Serious answer: why is it so important to you that atheism IS
associated with faith? Atheism is LACK OF faith (or belief) in gods.
--
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They slander each
other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and cannot come to any sort of
agreement in their teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its own
with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its
side."
- Celsus On the True Doctrine, translated by R. Joseph Hoffman, Oxford University Press, 1987
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 07:55:19 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 04:08:08 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 21:28:44 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> said in alt.atheism:
If there's no one standing next to you it doesn't take faith to not
believe that there's someone there - all it takes is sanity.
A person is something physical. God is not physical, thus it is
impossible to disprove.
Which begs the question.
It doesn't need disproof, it needs PROOF. Barring that there's
nothing to have faith IN.
Why is it so important for an atheist to not be associated with faith?
Serious question.
Stupid question. It has been explained to him many times that atheism
isn't his strawman and what it actually is, requires no faith. Only to
be ignored each time.
Serious answer: why is it so important to you that atheism IS
associated with faith? Atheism is LACK OF faith (or belief) in gods.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
08 Nov 2004 09:50:57 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 21:28:44 -0600, Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net>
wrote:
Al Klein's wisdom:
Many people that aren't believers have a lot of questions. I'd assume it
would teach people that it is alright to not believe in any sky gods.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs a lot more than someone
saying "it's all right".
So basically all atheists think that everyone is insane,
I have read this post, three times, and I still cannot find where Al, said that.
and shouldn't
need any help sorting things out?
There may well be those who could use a little help, but I fear, that you are
not the person to give it.
Is this the consensus here?
I disagree.
I think there might be a lot of people that need reassurance that it's ok
to not believe in god.
snip
Now that I think about it, it does take faith that Santa does not exist.
Why is it so important for an atheist to not be associated with faith?
Serious question.
One of the definitions of "faith", is belief without evidence.
That is "objective" evidence, "subjective" evidence, is not evidence.
Atheists tend to be Cynics.
Cynics accept nothing, without evidence.
For the atheist, there is only objective reality.
Reality interacts with it's surroundings, and produces empirical evidence of
it's existence.
There is no reason to believe anything exists, which does not leave empirical
evidence.
As there has never been tangible evidence of gods, faeries, santa, etc, there is
no logical reason to believe they exist.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
08 Nov 2004 08:57:58 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:37:35 -0600, Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net>
wrote:
Al Klein's wisdom:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism?
What is there to study.
....Apart from, Biology, Geology, Paleontology, Physics, Chemistry, Organic
Chemistry, etc, which really require a Collage sort of environment.
But go ahead.
How does one "practice" atheism.
"Now we stand and don't pray"?
Many people that aren't believers have a lot of questions.
Such as?
I'd assume it
would teach people that it is alright to not believe in any sky gods.
Non believers, know that already.
But start your church.
I doubt me, you will get any atheists in there, but there are always theists,
xtians mainly, who will "prove" that they are atheists, by shouting "I Hate
God", and taking the ***** out of the local vicar, and his congregation.
Still, there money is as good as anyone else's.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Faith in? Reality?
Sure.
Gravity, works by faith: Interesting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
08 Nov 2004 10:10:14 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:57:58 GMT, Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey>
said in alt.atheism:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:37:35 -0600, Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net>
wrote:
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Faith in? Reality?
Sure.
Gravity, works by faith: Interesting.
Yes. And if you lose faith in gravity you'll float away into space.
Everyone has faith in gravity. Those who didn't are no longer with
us.
--
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They slander each
other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and cannot come to any sort of
agreement in their teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its own
with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its
side."
- Celsus On the True Doctrine, translated by R. Joseph Hoffman, Oxford University Press, 1987
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
11 Nov 2004 07:03:49 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism?
What a pathetically ignorant troll. You really need to apply for a
tuition refund both from your public education as well as troll
school.
[]
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
06 Nov 2004 05:47:26 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
I would discuss my views pertaining to my faith, and discuss the myths of
the bible, and I'd pass the plate and take donations that would cover the
expenses of the church and my salary, same as any church.
What are the laws for a church to be recognized?
Pardon if this has been discussed before.
It's a philosophical point, essentially.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
06 Nov 2004 02:27:03 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Don't be so fucking stupid.
There is zero reason to consider that it exists therefore zero reason
to believe.
How the heck does that take faith, morob?
And why load the unjustified with an "either way"?
I would discuss my views pertaining to my faith, and discuss the myths of
the bible, and I'd pass the plate and take donations that would cover the
expenses of the church and my salary, same as any church.
What are the laws for a church to be recognized?
Pardon if this has been discussed before.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
07 Nov 2004 08:20:30 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Don't be so fucking stupid.
Is this neccasary?
There is zero reason to consider that it exists therefore zero reason
to believe.
I guess that is your opinion.
How the heck does that take faith, morob?
Why is faith a bad thing? I have faith the Raiders will win the SB every
year, until I see otherwise.
This year I have little faith.
BTW, if one is to call someone a "moron" I suggest they at least spell it
right.
And why load the unjustified with an "either way"?
What is unjustified, exactly?
<snip>
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
07 Nov 2004 08:45:33 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:20:30 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Don't be so fucking stupid.
Is this neccasary?
Was it necessary for you to lie about atheists, to atheists on an
atheist newsgroup?
Ask atheists what it means to be one, and we'll tell you.
Tell us what it means and get it wrong, and you're just plain stupid.
There is zero reason to consider that it exists therefore zero reason
to believe.
I guess that is your opinion.
Fact. Not opinion.
How the heck does that take faith, morob?
Why is faith a bad thing? I have faith the Raiders will win the SB every
year, until I see otherwise.
Answer the question, moron.
This year I have little faith.
BTW, if one is to call someone a "moron" I suggest they at least spell it
right.
So I can't type. Does that make you any less of a moron?
And why load the unjustified with an "either way"?
What is unjustified, exactly?
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
07 Nov 2004 09:01:12 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:20:30 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Don't be so fucking stupid.
Is this neccasary?
Was it necessary for you to lie about atheists, to atheists on an
atheist newsgroup?
What did I lie about? Be specific.
Ask atheists what it means to be one, and we'll tell you.
Tell us what it means and get it wrong, and you're just plain stupid.
Well you are wrong right off the bat if you claim that being an atheist
does not require some faith.
Unless you can prove god doesn't exist. CHOP CHOP.
There is zero reason to consider that it exists therefore zero reason
to believe.
I guess that is your opinion.
Fact. Not opinion.
Can I call you a liar now?
How the heck does that take faith, morob?
Why is faith a bad thing? I have faith the Raiders will win the SB every
year, until I see otherwise.
Answer the question, moron.
You say there is zero chance that god exists. Prove it.
Then we can go from there.
This year I have little faith.
BTW, if one is to call someone a "moron" I suggest they at least spell it
right.
So I can't type. Does that make you any less of a moron?
No, that just makes you an *****.
And I thought xians are assholes.
And why load the unjustified with an "either way"?
What is unjustified, exactly?
<snip>
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richo" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
08 Nov 2004 07:56:16 PM |
|
|
Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bf89d725136afa1989ace@news.midco.net>...
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:20:30 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence either
way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist.
Don't be so fucking stupid.
Is this neccasary?
Was it necessary for you to lie about atheists, to atheists on an
atheist newsgroup?
What did I lie about? Be specific.
Chris is jumping the gun here.
You may well not be lying - you may genuinely not understand why this
pisses people like Chris off.
He is assuming that you know perfectly well why this pisses people off
and are simply pretending innocence.
This is unfair.
As a general principle:
I try not to put down to maliciousness what can be easily be explained
as ignorance or missunderstanding.
8-)
Ask atheists what it means to be one, and we'll tell you.
Tell us what it means and get it wrong, and you're just plain stupid.
Well you are wrong right off the bat if you claim that being an atheist
does not require some faith.
Unless you can prove god doesn't exist. CHOP CHOP.
Two things: "Falacy of equivocation" (on the meaning of "faith")
and "bait and switch".
Again - you may not be doing this conciously but entirely innocently.
Words have multiple meanings and senses - this is not your fault, its
just the way things are.
If you are however *aware* of the multiple meanings and sense of words
and then deliberately mix them around - then that *is* naughty.
There is zero reason to consider that it exists therefore zero reason
to believe.
I guess that is your opinion.
Fact. Not opinion.
Can I call you a liar now?
To do that (and remaining reasonable) you would need certain knowledge
that Chris is in possesion of one or more reasons to believe in God
(or whatever god we are considering this fine day).
Are you really in possesion of such certain knowledge?
Do you read minds for example?
How the heck does that take faith, morob?
Why is faith a bad thing? I have faith the Raiders will win the SB every
year, until I see otherwise.
Answer the question, moron.
You say there is zero chance that god exists.
He didnt actually say that (I checked) - he said he had zero reason to
believe in God.
That's quite a different claim.
Prove it.
Even if he cannot prove it - it may still be true.
8-)
Mark.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 07:53:03 AM |
|
|
On 8 Nov 2004 17:56:16 -0800, (Richo) wrote:
Gary DeWaay <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bf89d725136afa1989ace@news.midco.net>...
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:20:30 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Christopher A. Lee's wisdom:
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:50:38 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
What if I started a church that practiced and studied atheism? Would I be
able to get all the perks? The tax breaks, and as the pastor, not having
to pay SS, etc.
Don't be so fucking stupid.
Is this neccasary?
Was it necessary for you to lie about atheists, to atheists on an
atheist newsgroup?
What did I lie about? Be specific.
"It would be practicing faith, because there clearly is no evidence
either way that god exists, so it takes faith to be an atheist" after
he had been corrected several times.
We told him several times what an atheist is, why his
misrepresentation is incorrect etc.
And he ignored it every time.
Until I typed it in the form of: once again <explanation in all
capitals>.
When he finally took notice he then wanted to know why we hadn't said
it earlier.
Which was just plain stupid.
Chris is jumping the gun here.
You may well not be lying - you may genuinely not understand why this
pisses people like Chris off.
He got it wrong the first time.
And was corrected.
Which he ignored instead of admitting his mistake.
Frustrated repetition of the correction and explanation were dismissed
and not addressed.
He treated this as being the equivalent to fundamentalism.
Which could only have been a deliberate lie, designed to escalate what
he started.
He is assuming that you know perfectly well why this pisses people off
and are simply pretending innocence.
He is. He's been corrected several times, and knows what he's doing.
Either that or he has some kind of cognitive dissonance which makes
what people tell him vanish.
Whichever it is, the result is the same.
He has been corrected, and ignored it each time, repeating what can no
longer be an honest mistake.
This is unfair.
As a general principle:
I try not to put down to maliciousness what can be easily be explained
as ignorance or missunderstanding.
8-)
Ask atheists what it means to be one, and we'll tell you.
Tell us what it means and get it wrong, and you're just plain stupid.
Well you are wrong right off the bat if you claim that being an atheist
does not require some faith.
Which was just plain nasty.
Unless you can prove god doesn't exist. CHOP CHOP.
Which was just plain stupid in the light of what he had been told.
Several times.
Two things: "Falacy of equivocation" (on the meaning of "faith")
and "bait and switch".
Yep.
Again - you may not be doing this conciously but entirely innocently.
Words have multiple meanings and senses - this is not your fault, its
just the way things are.
But it's not rocket science that words have different meanings
according to context. Too many theists realise this for everything
else, but forget it when it comes to their religion.
Seen from outside it there are hundreds of different god-beliefs, none
of which are substantively different. All their believers use
inside-the-religion criteria to make theirs seem special/real/etc.
Christians are no different. But they don't apply to anybody else.
They seem to have a mental block realising this.
If you are however *aware* of the multiple meanings and sense of words
and then deliberately mix them around - then that *is* naughty.
There is zero reason to consider that it exists therefore zero reason
to believe.
I guess that is your opinion.
Fact. Not opinion.
Can I call you a liar now?
To do that (and remaining reasonable) you would need certain knowledge
that Chris is in possesion of one or more reasons to believe in God
(or whatever god we are considering this fine day).
Are you really in possesion of such certain knowledge?
Do you read minds for example?
The problem is that like most theists and far too many agnostics (if
he is indeed one) he has these nice pat definitions - which attempt to
describe as though the theist's premises were universally granted.
They form a false trichotomy which is invalid even in the theist's
worldview.
But rather than have the courtesy to grant that we're not as these
labels describe, they (and he) rudely insist that they are accurate.
The discontinuous mind at work (Richard Dawkins' description, but he
was talking about something else).
Assigning arbitrary labels to points on axes and assuming that these
are the only possibilities.
He was told several times that these definitions are based on premises
that don't even apply to us.
He was told several times that the word "God" only has the theist's
meaning inside their theism.
He was told several times that outside their theism, all it is, is
"something somebody else believes". A particular type of abstraction.
People believe all sorts of things. A lot of these beliefs are
religious in nature.
The very questions theists ask to try and determine our position
aren't even valid outside their religion. When we try to explain why,
and what it actually is, they re-interpret it to fit their
preconceptions about us and their presuppositions about their deity.
How the heck does that take faith, morob?
Why is faith a bad thing? I have faith the Raiders will win the SB every
year, until I see otherwise.
Not the first non sequitur, red herring and why I used the m-word
below.
These are blatant dodge-ball.
Answer the question, moron.
You say there is zero chance that god exists.
He didnt actually say that (I checked) - he said he had zero reason to
believe in God.
Theists can't tell the difference. A self-described agnostic should be
able to.
It's an example of why I used the l-word, that he pretended was being
used as an insult rather than an observation.
Remember that this was after I had explained a couple of times that
the theist's god-premise doesn't even apply.
That's quite a different claim.
Prove it.
The dishonest demand that I prove a strawman of his devising.
Even if he cannot prove it - it may still be true.
8-)
Mark.
Atheism and agnosticism are the zero points of different axes, one
being theism and the other knowledge.
They're not even on the same graph.
One graph is whether or not one is theist, which god they believe and
the strength of that belief.
The other graph is of knowledge about deity, and is actually pretty
useless. Because in spite of their claims, theists don't know
(although a few honest theists admit that).
Atheists haven't got anything to "not know". While agnostics
implicitly grant the theist's starting point in order to say they
don't know.
The atheist is simply somebody who isn't theist. That's all.
Most atheists haven't even got the theist's meaning/understanding/etc
of "God" in their paradigm. It's an abstraction, something somebody
else believes. A cultural phenomenon: the Mayans believed in a deity
called QuetzalCotl, The Greeks in one called Zeus etc. Christians
believe in one called God.
And on the rare occasions they say there's no gods, it's in exactly
the same way they'd say there are no leprechauns.
It's not a faith. Just a throwaway remark about something out of
somebody else's mythology.
Agnostics seem to have the theist's deity in their paradigm, in the
form theists understand it, in order to say they don't know.
The simplistic thinker imagines they are points on the same line.
The agnostic sees himself at the zero point with theism on one side
and atheism on the other.
The atheist sees himself at the zero point with theism down one axis
and agnosticism part way along it.
The atheist has some justification for this because the agnostic
singles one particular deity to be agnostic about, treating it
differently than all the other beliefs.
The agnostic is usually only agnostic about one particular theism, and
is just as atheistic as the atheist about all the others.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
08 Nov 2004 10:25:07 PM |
|
|
Richo's wisdom:
Chris is jumping the gun here.
You may well not be lying - you may genuinely not understand why this
pisses people like Chris off.
He is assuming that you know perfectly well why this pisses people off
and are simply pretending innocence.
This is unfair.
Thank you.
As a general principle:
I try not to put down to maliciousness what can be easily be explained
as ignorance or missunderstanding.
I came to the atheist NG to ask questions about atheists.
It's as simple as that.
--
Gary
Are we feeling united yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 06:54:15 AM |
|
|
"Gary DeWaay" <dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1bfa029e4c218cc1989aef@news.midco.net...
Richo's wisdom:
Chris is jumping the gun here.
You may well not be lying - you may genuinely not understand why this
pisses people like Chris off.
He is assuming that you know perfectly well why this pisses people off
and are simply pretending innocence.
This is unfair.
Thank you.
As a general principle:
I try not to put down to maliciousness what can be easily be explained
as ignorance or missunderstanding.
I came to the atheist NG to ask questions about atheists.
Yeah, but then you're telling us what we believe - That's the problem.
--
---------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: An atheist church? |
09 Nov 2004 08:09:06 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 22:25:07 -0600, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Richo's wisdom:
Chris is jumping the gun here.
You may well not be lying - you may genuinely not understand why this
pisses people like Chris off.
He is assuming that you know perfectly well why this pisses people off
and are simply pretending innocence.
This is unfair.
Thank you.
As a general principle:
I try not to put down to maliciousness what can be easily be explained
as ignorance or missunderstanding.
I came to the atheist NG to ask questions about atheists.
No, you didn't.
You told us what our position was and wouldn't listen to correction.
It's as simple as that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
