Yes you are right, but lets draw a distinction between mainstream and fundamentalist.
Fundamentalism in any religion is dangerous, and always based upon exploiting the the weak minded. Islamic fundamentalism is as political as it is religious, it's wrong, stupid and doomed to failure.

 

I'll go over this again. If you lack a belief in ANY god(s) you're an atheist. If you believe in ANY god, even if you never go to any church or religious ceremony, never pray or whatever then you're a theist. It's that simple.

If you believe in the Abrahmic god, then as well as being a theist you're either Jewish, Christian or Muslim. If you believe that Christ is the saviour, you're a Christian. That's it, the only requirement.

 

Religion has always been abused by those out for their own ends, the power hungry. Some Muslims are doing that now, as many Christians are and certainly have done in Britain. These are the people who twist religion and make it come across as a tool, and bad. However, religion for most who follow it, in it's true form, this is not the case. It is a way of life, which should be about tolerance and respect for others, and for the majority of people, this is most likely to be the way in which they live their religious life.

Unfortunately, religion is open to abuse by people in power, and so can be used as a dangerous tool at times, to further their power over people through fear, however, if you remove religion, they would find some other way of meeting their own ends as these people just want control over others and religion is a convenient excuse.

 

No you're right it doesn't, but it also doesn't mean that we live in a 'christian country' either

 

Please tell me why you keep coming back at my posts using the word 'commited'.

In none of my posts did i use this word, so dont twist things to make your aurgument sound more reasonable.

What is a 'commited' Christian? someone that does not drink? **********? have sex before marriage? swear? The list goes on and on.

If you wanted to go on that basis id say that Christianity was almost dead.

And so would many other religions.

 

But that was just one person how many other's havent been found and deported geting something for nothing.

 

well, by this governments own best guess 750,000 are here already.

 

When you say 'something for nothing' you mean treated I take it?

 

Very well said Lisa, right on the button and saves me from having to post myself.

Les

 

Les, I was saving you from being in the firing line, my Christian act for the day

 

I disagree.

Me giving £10 to oxfam once does not make me a philanthropist.

 

For the love of dog. A better man than I once said "atheism is as much a belief as not collecting stamps is a hobby".

theism is the belief in a god or gods
a- means without
atheism - without the belief in god or gods. No belief, just the abscence there of.

Now if you want to try and claim that atheism is the "belief that no gods exist", well fine, but you have the definition of the word incorrect and are presenting a position that most atheists do not claim. The "strong" atheists may well claim such, but they are few and far between.

 

I like that.

 

...and so the merry go round turns.

 

And so the merry go round turns.

Who knows better than those asked if they are a member of the Christian denomination and believe in JC, I guess they do.


I'd agree, donation is in the plural. Give £10 twice and it may be a different story.

 

Me too, I think it makes the point rather well.

 

My point was that to be an Atheist you have taken a position, most people don't have a fixed position and therefore default to CofE - thats an opinion of course not a fact

 

Yup I would go along with that - Don't think Olly will though


Persoanlly I don't think C of E stands for Aetheist, Agnostic or Arch Bishop - I think it stands for Apathetic.

 

I beleive there was a person called Jesus who talked a lot of sense, but I wouldn't describe myself as a Christian. Muslims believe in the prophet Jesus as well.

 

I think the point is, to be Christian, it is not just believing Jesus existed, but that he was the saviour, the son of God. Jews also believe in Jesus, but not that he was the son of God, hence they are not Christians.

 

How many children believe in a god before they are taught about it?

If the answer is "not many" or less than that, the default position is atheism.

 

Think about that one again fella - Ignorance is not aetheisism.

 

<Tangent>

He certainly wasn't called Jesus, that's just a translation issue. His real name in pre-exilic Hebrew was Yehoshua or in the Second Temple period Yeshua or Joshua. The joys of going from word of mouth through a couple of intermediary languages before you get to English.

But you struggle to find much evidence for "Christ" outside the new testament to be honest. There are a couple of references to a Jesus in some Judaic writings of the time, but they are suspected to have been forged, largely because it wouldn't have said "Jesus" in the text anyway it would have said "Yehoshua".

</tangent>

I wouldn't say you were a Christian from that either. If you had said you believe that Christ is your saviour, then I'd say you probably were.

 

Thank you, I have defined "Christian" twice now in about 8 words, but maybe you're version will sink in better.

 

I don't disagree, in fact I agree! And given that this defines what being a christian is, it's pretty difficult to describe this a christian country

 

Has this woman been reported yet?

 

atheism doesn't require a justifcation of the position, it's the opposite of a belief in god(s). If you don't have a belief in god(s) you are an atheist, ignorant or not.

Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. Now we start to get in to gnostic and agnostic. Most theists are agnostic as are most atheists. To claim to be gnostic you must have knowledge of something. As very few people claim absolutely the existance (or not) of a god (as it's pretty much unprovable in general terms) and so they are agnostic, it's the only logical position to take.

So a child lacks knowledge of god and doesn't have a belief in god, so they are an agnostic atheist.

I'd perhaps go further and say that to be ignorant of something requires that thing exists in the first place, then you're back to the problem of trying to prove god.

 

If you want to know if somebody considers christ to be their saviour, who is the best person to ask? The person in question?

 

My take on this would be that a child is not inherently aetheist, but instead inherently agnostic - you could equally argue though that infact both are choices so neither apply

 

Would your wife have reported her had she not had an unrelated issue with her and found out? If so, she's acting in accordance with her genuine feelings on the issue and not just out of revenge, then I can see why she would.

But reporting someone just because you have an unrelated issue with them would seem a bit hippocritical.

I think she should get her facts straight, as you've said, and then wait till she has cooled down before doing something she may later regret.

Ns04