Heh heh, you caught me working on my understatement skills

Yeah what's up with that?

My friend (Triphid), you know nothing about my motivations. As a matter of fact, I could not care less about points, or getting to the next level. I have been at level 7 for years, and would need to almost double my points total to reach level 8. At the rate I'm going, that will be sometime in the 2040s. The fastest way to gain points, by the way, is by posting, which I do only rarely. In the years I have been on this site I have only posted 70-something times. The vast majority of my activity has been writing comments (over 700 so far). My post-to-comment ratio says it all. Furthermore, if you were to analyse my comments, you would find a rather high average word count. If I were just seeking points, I could cover a lot more ground and get a lot more points by just tossing off a couple of words, or even just an emoji. You are way off base bra.

Judging from the responses here, people are interested in this topic. Apparently it could use a little rehashing. And why not? There are always new members coming along who may never have heard the joke before, or participated in the semantic discussion. AND, by the way, as time passes, the historical context keeps changing. You will note that I placed this old topic in the current context with this comment:

"There are places in the world today where being outed as an atheist could be a death sentence. And the current efforts by Evangelical Christians to grab power in this country through anti-democratic means, the slide towards authoritarian theocracy is indeed somewhat worrisome."

Are you happy with the way things are going in our country? Are you not bothered by the anti-democratic activities of the Republican Party, and the fact that millions of Americans are embracing Trump's big lie, and that white supremacists pose the biggest domestic terrorism threat? Do you not see the connection between unsupported belief in a deity and unsupported belief in voter fraud? Isn't it the same flabby thinking in both cases? In that light, isn't the agnotsic vs atheist semantic discussion totally relevant and timely?

Yes, and we had better take good care of that right, because we could lose it. In a political environment where objective facts don't matter, anything goes. The Republican Party's break with reality is a very worrisome sign.

I don't know either. Maybe it's just inertia? Or consumerism?

@Flyingsaucesir I think the child of consumerism and obedience.

Christmas isn’t really about Christ. Some of the rituals come from Saturnalia which predates Christianity and most of the others (Santa Claus) have nothing to do with the Christ story. Hell … if he existed, Christ was probably born in the spring time anyway.

If you enjoy it, why not celebrate the parts that have nothing to do with the manger?

Speaking for myself, I always celebrated this so-called Christian Festival as it was originally, the Ancient Roman Festival of Gift Giving, Saturnalia, with my daughter.
Now I do the same for my nephew, Henry, and try to teach him that it IS the giving of gifts accompanied by love that the Festival is REALLY about and NOT the celebration of some completely unfounded, mythical Birth that never happened.

@Triphid That's somewhat easier for me to understand but still has the feel of appeasement to me. Like still financially supporting a holiday which stokes Xtian fires and indoctrination. People who like the Xtian Hymns, or Carrols, give me the same sense of enabling the Xtian story.

@rainmanjr Well, since we are all individuals is not reasonable to say that we all have our own views and ways when it is really boiled down to the basics of things?

@Triphid No. If that were true then Jan 6th was just a difference of opinion.

@deepeddy If you enjoy white privilege why try to wrap your head around 1921 Tulsa? Hold your festival in January, maybe for the 1st, and it wouldn't contribute to the Xtain holiday's sales and participation numbers.

@rainmanjr
Enabling....an important concept here. Moderate religious believers enable the extremists. In a way, by accepting at face value the proposition that the same Old Testament God exists, moderate Christians in America enable the extremists in ISIS and the Taliban halfway around the world.

@rainmanjr Oh come on now, even you MUST know the difference between opinions and outright rebellious behaviour/incitation to revolt, etc, etc..
Don't you think your response was just a bit trite and banal to say the very least?

@Triphid I find most of human affairs to be trite and banal but not my own. A behavior, rebellious or submissive, is always a manifestation of an opinion. The opinion, formed by an idea, gives necessary heat which creates a physical reaction. So the difference is rather significant. etc, etc...

Christmas had something to do with religion? Could have fooled me. That's like sex being about babies and Budweiser being about enjoying a flavorful beverage.

@JeffMurray TBF, sex isn't always about having babies and Budweiser's flavor is, shall we say, delicate. Christmas has mostly been about $ right from the start. Santa's colors are the same as Coca-Cola for good reason. Coke paid Th Nast for the illustration.

@rainmanjr "I find most of human affairs to be trite and banal but not my own."
Now, speaking here as a Highly respected and well Qualified Psychologist I'd say that kind of a statement/comment was to be expected BUT only from the most narcissistic of personalities possible.
As your hypothesis, which the impression I glean from your comment in reference to behaviour, etc, I would correct IF I were talking to someone not so Narcissistic as I, imo, feel you may well be.

@Triphid 96% of humanity is narcissistic so I'm in good company. ho ho ho. You should improve your practice by getting a sense of humor. As it should be with a narcissist what you glean or would correct is not of great interest for me. Merry July 4th.

Christmas has never been a religious celebration for me.

It has always been a day off of work and an opportunity to party, drink a lot of booze, and raise a toast to the rising sun as the days can now begin to lengthen again.
Hell yeah! A rousing good time in a dark and dreary time of year is a good thing to elevate the mood. With any luck, the party will last through New Years Eve

@dumasarok You can't put it off until NYE-whenever so that it doesn't unintentionally support a religious incursion of our general society? Religion should be conducted inside homes and Churches. Not the town square...and all that rot. Does it not mean more than putting off the party? I'm asking for a friend.

The Romans borrowed it (theos) from the Greeks.

@Flyingsaucesir Yep, Roman = Deos, Greek = Theos.

In the USA they're not running everything, but they would if they could, and they are trying hard to grab power. Thankfully, they are losing ground, especially among younger people. I wish we could say the same about Afghanistan...

@Flyingsaucesir the Tooth Fairy believers???

Thank you. I do try.

there is an amazing hidden story in there that you may never find though, fwiw

@bbyrd009 perhaps u are right, but unfortunately, ill never just take somebody's word for it!

@HeAdAkE ah well i wouldnt expect you to, for sure, but really it isnt that hard to figure out; you ate fruit from the tree of knowledge, and go from there

none of those hideous, terrible things literally happened, almost surely; most of that is OT "Conquest Genre" stuff anyway, that contemporaries knew how to read...

"The Red Sox massacred the Yankees yesterday..."
how many people died?
so like that

@bbyrd009 no offense to ur reply but is it meant to be confusing shit like the special message from god to his special species?

@HeAdAkE lol
maybe, huh?
but no, really it is, among other things, a treatise on gnosticism v agnosticism in disguise sorta (fruit of the tree of knowledge, hello), bc everyone then was going all cult of sol, and as im sure you are already aware, you can't tell white ppl the truth

but srsly, how could a book where the main character has nothing but dis for the religious and is praising atheists and pagans be about religion?

there is a little (big) joke involved, i guess bc too much surprise stirs fear maybe?

@bbyrd009 i appreciate ur effort of course, but, i stopped reading after u stated....and as im sure you are already aware, you can't tell white ppl the truth

i can't stand it when ppl assume they know my mind

@HeAdAkE hmm, well, hopefully you see how that can also be a way to avoid coming off as superior?
or call it a bad segue into a funny video, maybe

@bbyrd009 ok ill give er a go

u sold me with that word u used

segue

i like

@bbyrd009 r u screwin with me?

quit it

everybody knows that jesus was a short sand nig

@HeAdAkE

@creative51 I got a $20 bill once from the Tooth Fairy. For some reason, Dad was extremely grumpy the next morning, muttering about fumbling in the dark.

@creative51 mah family is fuckin' rich cuz we live down heah in floriduh!

@creative51, @Notlost ya live in mar-a-lago???

@Mofo1953 hardly. We owned a ranch in Oklahoma.

there you go, see; it works great! Narcissists who hope to gain immortality are made plain to see, while Jesus of Nazareth = "John Doe, from Nowhere" is hidden from them, and "Jesus" pretty obviously had nothing but scorn for the religious, while praising atheists ("samaritans" ) and pagans ("roman centurions" )

Let children have their childhoods to the fullest.

"...if there are aliens out there they know we are here." That is, if they didn't blow themselves to smithereens or make their environment so unlivible they died out before the light from our sun in our time could reach them.

@Flyingsaucesir Maybe but hopefully they may be more sensible than homo sapiens

so, the definition has drifted now, but fwiw "agnostic" was originally "against gnosticism," which was a huge religious movement back in the day

hmm, really? could you example, ty

@bbyrd009 The second part of this paragraph is true.
The first part of this paragraph is a lie.

Another example is this post. "Why should the word atheist even exist, since we do not have words for none stamp collecting or none golfing etc." But then that leads to the logical question. Why should not every term/ word/ phrase have an equal and opposite negative.

" My wife and I were out walking in the town. When we saw my mother in law across the other side of the street. As we watched, a gang of four men, obviously criminals, began to violently assault her. My wife said. "Arn't you going to go over and help." I said. "No, four should be enough."

Questions our false logical assumtions about the nature of family relations, even pointing out a truth.

@Fernapple ha! good points. To your "equal and opposite negative" one, i notice that pretty much every term seems to have a like an unequal but not quite opposite definition; there are at least two definitions for any meaningful term, somehow?

but to your point, i dunno; what is the opposite of say "golfing?"

humor/logic nugget,

The word was first used in the 16th century to describe people who did not follow the Christian faith but like many words the meaning has changed and broadened over the years.

You say the true definition of the word atheist is "one who is without belief in god." Actually, this defines agnostics. Atheists actively believe in God's non-existence, while agnostics withhold belief. At least that is my understanding. You go on to cite "older dictionaries [which] define atheism as “a belief that there is no God.”" I don't want to belabor the point, but this is consistent with my understanding. It is, in my view, a better definition, though you rightly point out that it is biased in favor of monotheism.

@Flyingsaucesir The definition in the third paragraph is from the atheist.org link. Your definition of agnostic also differs from the conventional definition which is: One who does not know or is without knowledge (having nothing to do with belief).

Here's the dictionary versions

1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.
3. a person who holds neither of two opposing positions on a topic:

@racocn8
Okay, I concede that the definition of agnostic does not mention belief. In fact, the word is made up of two Greek words: a = not or non or against, and gnosis = knowledge. There is no "belief" there. I should have said, "agnostics simply hold that they don't know, and implicit in that is a lack of belief in the proposition in question."

@Flyingsaucesir i am "against knowledge" even though i believe in a Supreme Being, bc when you say that you "know" something, then the mind is closed to any other possibilities, wise in their own eyes

plus facts are mostly bullshit anyway, as DByrne has already sung about

@bbyrd009
Hey, stop making sense!

"the true definition of"
lol

I like the term "free thinker."

@Flyingsaucesir We agree. The problem with many labels is people using or identifying with them out of sentiment more than example. Can't tell you how many alleged 'free thinkers' are automata of this or that political ideology or party. If they are an 'ive' or 'ist', forget it. they might as well have hooves for toes.

"If there were no theists"
When I first read that, I thought 'that's a good way to put it'
. . . but
When has there ever been a time when there were NO theists ?

@FearlessFly I'm guessing we'd have to go back to the cavemen.

Ah, yes. Neil Degrass Tyson. The least credible authority on atheism. I don't think you really get him. You see, he doesn't like to call himself an atheist because that might offend some people, and nothing is more important to the good professor than his popularity. He so likes to be liked, you see, and well, truth be told, it actually takes what they used to call in the classics 'courage' to be an open atheist in America, and if one wants to be on mainstream TV and be a laughing dancing bear pop scientist it just won't do to call oneself an atheist, you see. Bottom line: don't quote NDGT to atheists.

@David1955 I understand about "quoting to illogical atheist " . Its understanding the Dunning-Kruger effect and illogical atheist blind spot.

[google.com]

Last year, I called Dunning to talk about the virtue of intellectual humility, or the ability to recognize that the things we believe [or have lack of belief] in might be wrong. It’s an essential trait, but a rare one.

“The first rule of the Dunning-Kruger club is you don’t know you’re a member of the Dunning-Kruger club,” he told me in an interview last year. “People miss that.”

Illogical atheist doesn't know they are illogical. B

Two great videos! Thanks for sharing!

@David1955
I independently came to the same basic conclusion as NDGT: there is some overlap in the meanings, but there is also a significant difference between atheist and agnostic, and the latter makes much more sense. It is impossible to prove that God does not exist, so belief that She doesn't makes about as much sense as belief that She does. As for NDGT's supposed concern over his popularity, well, I give him credit for hewing strictly to science an not pandering to either atheists or to the religious.

@Flyingsaucesir I don't have a problem with him calling himself either an agnostic or an atheist. That's his choice. What I dislike is his equivocating manner, half calling himself a sort of agnostic, kind of, while soft ball attacking atheism on logical consistency, while at the same oblivious to the logical problems in agnosticism which minds greater than mine, like Bertrand Russell, have essayed, and with which I am in total agreement. Apart from all that, in the end, he just wants to be popular, not offend anyone, which I find a little spineless. He seems like a nice guy. I like his popularisation of science, and he on occasion says things I totally agree with. But on this subject I find him conflicted and logically inconsistent.

@David1955
Hmmm....in the above video he said the only "ist" he is is a scientist, but if a label had to he assigned, the one that comes closest would be "agnostic," one who doesn't know but is willing to look at new evidence should it arise. This seems perfectly reasonable to me. He goes on to say that he doesn't have time or interest to "gather and strategize" or try to influence policy [relating belief in God]. That, as a personal choice that he makes, also sounds reasonable. I, however, am a bit more radical or activist than NDGT is. I think much policy implicitly favors religious belief and should be changed to reflect the highly dubious nature of the proposition that God exists. First, I would revoke the tax-exempt status of all religious organizations. In official documents I would refer to them as cults. I would not allow businesses to withhold service due to conflict with their religious beliefs. So the bakery could not refuse to provide a wedding cake to a gay couple, for instance. And they could not opt out of contributing to a healthcare fund that provides abortions or contraception. And I would have textbooks on biology ecplicitly point out that creation myths like the one in Genesis are not supported by evidence. I would make comparative mythology a regular part of school curricula, and history textbooks would cover religious wars in great detail. Psychology majors would learn the neuroscience indicating that the so-called religious experience can arise spontaneously in the human brain due to factors like temporal lobe epilepsy, stress, or even simple lack of sleep, and can easily be induced by drugs such as LSD, peyote, hayuhuasca, etc. In other words, I would never give them a break, in the hope that eventually religios thinking would be widely seen as ridiculous. The fact that NDGT does not go as far as me does not bother me at all. He is doing a good job at popularizing science, and you will catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

The only “ist” Tyson is is a scientist?

A mathematician or a theoretical physicist, perhaps. Neither uses the scientific method.

A scientist he is not. Here’s the opening paragraph in his book, Astrophysics for People in a Hurry:

“In the beginning, nearly fourteen billion years ago, all the space and all the matter and all the energy of the known universe was contained in a volume less than one-trillionth the size of the period that ends this sentence.”

That’s Georges LeMaitre’s religion. ( grin )

@Flyingsaucesir I see you replied to David but will comment or question rhetorically about your current understanding.

Why "revoke" tax exemption for "religious"? I copied something I already wrote so I don't have to write it all again.

Taxation and goverment required identification is a biblical mandate.

"If" you are saying that biblical mandates are "religious " and "U.S. laws shouldn't support or enforce ." Religious " mandates, then all taxation and Identification and capitalism slavery requiring is unconstitutional. Not to mention a violation of the Home, Land and Security of the original indigenous inhabitants that has been here for 1000s of years prior to the European invasion of 1492 and the Masonic lodge secret religion racist devil worshipper governmental terrorist freedom from England July 4th, 1776.

A third view for a definition of religion can be seen by looking at what is in the commonly and publicly used Dewey Decimal Classification 200-299 section. Biblical text found placed in this section provides that establishment and enforcement of government and laws is what religion is about. Government and religion are synonymous in this sense. The government of “United States of America “ is a continuation of the “biblical meme" or to say, it is prophesy being fulfilled. As it can be observed that many biblical prophesies have come to furition, it can be observed that circumstances are conducive for more prophesies to further come to furition.
Biblical text written in metaphor and riddles can be understood as an “evil genius”.
And no one could BUY or SELL anything without that mark, which was either the name of the beast or the number representing his name. Revelations 13:17

Capitalism slavery not able to buy or sell without government issued identification such as birth certificate, social security card and photo identification. Submit to Authority-666 pay taxes capitalism slavery.
Beast is a metaphor for laws of government, mark is another word for identifier. Mark is identification.
A tricky of the riddle is the “secret number – 666” tattooed on hand or forehead cause people to think that it’s not really the mark of the beast-666 if they only have a picture identification card with their “secret number” only being given out for official purposes that is only carried in their wallet.

@Word
One thing is for sure: religious texts are open to a wide range of interpretations. This is due to the fact that it is mostly fiction, and not tied to evidence-based facts. This has led to endless schism, resulting in over 40,000 different splinter sects in the "Christian" category alone. But historically, religion in general has had societal governance in its portfolio of functions. So it should come as no surprise that certain elements of secular governments can be found in ancient scripture. It is possible to borrow the useful bits and leave the trash on the cutting room floor.

@Flyingsaucesir I consider myself a former Christian. I do not have biblical text memorized word for word by any means, but I still have a lot of knowledge and understanding about it. I personally do not specifically categorize biblical text with other cultures unless there is a connection to do so. As to clumping biblical text into a category with other so call simular text from other cultures is some what mudding the water. At least, if you are wanting discussion about biblical text and Jesus style God.

The fact is, Illogical atheist Richard Dawkins has, only in recent times, give for the best understanding of viewing biblical text in understanding its explination that a meme mind virus evolved or developed into a person, Jesus character. I have written things in my group you can read there if you have interest. "Illogical atheists guide for ending Christianity "

@Flyingsaucesir I personally am not any expert in apologizing for biblical text. I know somethings are reasonable and scientific in understanding various things of why different interpretation, different stories that seem to conflict within biblical text.

For example, modern scientific understanding of eye witness testimony explains how 2 different eye witness can give slightly different accounts of a bank robbery that both eye witnesses observed. In understanding this, it can be viewed that some writtings of biblical text are purported as eye witness testimony and that different authors wrote the different accounts. Like one gospel (Matthew, Mark, Luke or John) gives a some what different story that another gospel writer. Understanding these are purported as testimony, hence called old or new Testiment, it can be understood they follow with things of understanding the psychological aspects of modern eye witness testimony science.

Like I said, much beyond that, I do not claim to be expert in appologies for biblical text, yet, I understand well enough there is genius to the themes and motifs of biblical text.

@Word
I like Dawkins, but I think that sometimes he goes too far. Sure, it's possible that Jesus is just a meme virus and never actually lived, but then why would there be contemporaneous Roman writings that refer to him? I'm willing to stipulate that Jesus lived, breathed, walked, and preached. But on the question if whether he was (is) the messiah, I'm with the Jews on that (i.e. NOT!).

@Flyingsaucesir no, you do not understand my observations. Jesus being a meme that by evolution processes because a person. Like the evolutionary process that brought a single celled organism to be a homo sapian and all the other cell based organisms.

@Word wrote,
"Jesus being a meme that by evolution processes because a person."

Huh?

@Flyingsaucesir this is my group, read over the discussions I have made. Should be rather self explanatory but feel free to question or comment there. click here: "Illogical atheists guide for ending Christianity "