NationStates Jolt Archive

This is not insultive and not intended to be such. Definintions of narrow-minded.

lacking tolerance or flexibility or breadth of view; "a brilliant but narrow-minded judge"; "narrow opinions"
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn


rigidly adhering to a particular sect or its doctrines
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn



If they are narrow-minded is that necessarily a bad thing?

Could it create an US vs THEM mentality?

What are the possible implications of an US vs THEM mentality?

Reading through the thread, I would have to say it does create US vs THEM mentality. That is true for all kinds of groups though. And, yes, narrow-mindedness is a bad thing.

Some are, some aren't. It really just depends.

Some Christian groups, such as Calvinism, are extremely warped in their sense of reality and are extremely closed minded. Other groups, such as the Methodists and the Quakers, are quite liberal in their mindset.

Same is true of other religions. Chabad Lubavitch, a hassidic sect of Judaism, is rather closed, but Breslov, a different hassidic sect, is quite open and liberal.

I have found, however, in my experience, is that people are open or closed minded, while religion is just the tool they use to justify themselves.

Reading through the thread, I would have to say it does create US vs THEM mentality. That is true for all kinds of groups though. And, yes, narrow-mindedness is a bad thing.

Depends. At some point some where along the line, you have to put down your foot and stand for something. Otherwise you have no identity. You just become a cog in the wheel ofthe collective.

I'm not sure what part of the quote your responding to, HorMaN. I do agree with Keruvalia, it does depend on the person. Some religions are notorious for this kind of mind set, some aren't.

I'm not sure what part of the quote your responding to, HorMaN. I do agree with Keruvalia, it does depend on the person. Some religions are notorious for this kind of mind set, some aren't.

I was responding tonarrow-mindness is a bad thing. Ex: Idon't think its bad to be narrow-minded against genocide. Anyway, gotta go to class. Later, babe. :fluffle:

I have found, however, in my experience, is that people are open or closed minded, while religion is just the tool they use to justify themselves.

Interesting. i find the opposite to be true. People feel that they have to be closed minded in order to adhere to their religeon. You don;t have to be closed minded to hold on to your beleifs. And on a side note, just becasue you are conservative doesn;t mean you are closed minded.

It doesnt just vary by religion or denomination, it varies from person to person. Some are narrow minded and some are not. Ive seen as many narrow minded atheists as I have christians.

It doesnt just vary by religion or denomination, it varies from person to person. Some are narrow minded and some are not. Ive seen as many narrow minded atheists as I have christians.

hooray!

I honestly think i have seen mor closed minded athiests. Just becasue you don;t believe in a god doesn;t mean they you don;t blindly follow your faith (yes, i call it a faith). If you senselessly flame/bash/insult someoen becasue of their religeon, you are more closed minded than they are.

hooray!

I honestly think i have seen mor closed minded athiests. Just becasue you don;t believe in a god doesn;t mean they you don;t blindly follow your faith (yes, i call it a faith). If you senselessly flame/bash/insult someoen becasue of their religeon, you are more closed minded than they are.

Yeah, but most atheists arent interested in bashing religion, only a few are. It just so happens that some of those who are interested in incessantly bashing religion come to this forum. It is not a common practice in the outside world, however.

Interesting. i find the opposite to be true. People feel that they have to be closed minded in order to adhere to their religeon.

Granted, but I often find that the people who feel that way were taught to be that way by their fellow man, rather than learning it for themselves by reading their holy text.

You don;t have to be closed minded to hold on to your beleifs. And on a side note, just becasue you are conservative doesn;t mean you are closed minded.

True ... and true!

Some atheists are more closed-minded than some Christians; I find that most atheists have a sort of antagonism to all Christians because they have spent so much time dealing with the closed-minded ones. When they meet an open-minded one, they don't generally know what to do and frequently end up making asses out of themselves.

However, I also think that closed-minded atheists > closed-minded Christians, because atheists' arguments, though they are more aggressive than necessary tend to be based on reason rather than faith. I have never seen an atheist that blindly follows his or her "faith" (and atheism isn't one, by the way).

Some atheists are more closed-minded than some Christians; I find that most atheists have a sort of antagonism to all Christians because they have spent so much time dealing with the closed-minded ones. When they meet an open-minded one, they don't generally know what to do and frequently end up making asses out of themselves.

However, I also think that closed-minded atheists > closed-minded Christians, because atheists' arguments, though they are more aggressive than necessary tend to be based on reason rather than faith. I have never seen an atheist that blindly follows his or her "faith" (and atheism isn't one, by the way).


Faith is believing in something. it has nothing to do with a higher power. I have faith that there is a god.

athiestw have faith that their is no god.

[QUOTE=Keruvalia]Some are, some aren't. It really just depends.

Some Christian groups, such as Calvinism, are extremely warped in their sense of reality and are extremely closed minded. Other groups, such as the Methodists and the Quakers, are quite liberal in their mindset.

Same is true of other religions. Chabad Lubavitch, a hassidic sect of Judaism, is rather closed, but Breslov, a different hassidic sect, is quite open and liberal.

I have found, however, in my experience, is that people are open or closed minded, while religion is just the tool they use to justify themselves.[/QU

When you say open and liberal do you mean to say they believe that those outside their faith can achieve heaven? OR whatever the ultimate goal is?

I think a religon that endorses they are the one "truth" is very narrow-minded while they may allow freedom within the religon the whole of the religon is narrow-minded.

Calvanism isn't a religeon. being a baptist doesn't mean you have a different religion. It just means that those specific groups translate the bible differently without changing the passages (Jehova's Witnesses change the test of John for it to read that the bible is a God, but that isn;t pertinent here). They are all christians, just different ways of worshoping. Anyone who believs that the only way to get to heaven is through christ is a christian. catholics are christians, just the rest are protestants, they believe that all men have a direct line to God, catholics believe that the only go-between is a priest.

Faith is believing in something. it has nothing to do with a higher power. I have faith that there is a god.

athiestw have faith that their is no god.

This is not a truism

Faith: unquestioned belief.

I would say the vast majority of Atheist question things all the time. They question their belief most being of scientific mindset would change their belief when more evidence would indicate such a change.

When you say open and liberal do you mean to say they believe that those outside their faith can achieve heaven? OR whatever the ultimate goal is?


Sort of. For example, in Islam, it is not humans who can determine what is to happen after death. Muslims are not allowed to condemn others to Hell lest they face apostacy. It says in Qur'an, "Forgive those who reject the path of Allah, for Allah knows their hearts and determines all." (somewhat paraphrased)

Hence, it's not a matter of believing a non-Muslim can obtain Paradise, it's more a matter of not knowing and not being my place to say either way.

Faith: unquestioned belief.


Faith: Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

In both Judaism and Islam, that faith comes of questioning. We are commanded to learn, to question, and to argue (even if that means arguing with the Allmighty). We believe that learning about science and the natural world is a way of learning about Allah - why do you think we (Muslims) invented Algebra, the astrolabe, built the world's first observatories, studied anatomy and medicine, built some of the largest and most comprehensive libraries in the world, and made scientific advances in astonomy, medicine, and physics in the 9th to 14th centuries that are still in wide use today?

Atheists do not have a lock on knowledge. Even Isaac Newton was a devoted Christian.

Narrowmindedness automatically is accompanied by a lack of empathy. A narrowminded person has e.g. great dificulty understanding there are people that do not think as he/she does - and that these people are not necessarily 'inferior'. This is IMO a bad thing - though that is a subjective opinion.

Sort of. For example, in Islam, it is not humans who can determine what is to happen after death. Muslims are not allowed to condemn others to Hell lest they face apostacy. It says in Qur'an, "Forgive those who reject the path of Allah, for Allah knows their hearts and determines all." (somewhat paraphrased)

Hence, it's not a matter of believing a non-Muslim can obtain Paradise, it's more a matter of not knowing and not being my place to say either way.

If this is true then why do you adhere to the muslim faith? If it is not up to humans then that inferes it is up to Allah correct?

If it is up to Allah then why do you practice Islam?

This appears to be contradictory.

Are you attempting to gain favor with Allah?

Are there rules or conditions that must be met in order to go to heaven
set forth by Allah?

If this is true then why do you adhere to the muslim faith?

Because I believe it to be the correct path for me. Note: FOR ME. It may not be for you.

If it is not up to humans then that inferes it is up to Allah correct?

Yes.

If it is up to Allah then why do you practice Islam?

See above.

Are you attempting to gain favor with Allah?

In a way, yes.

Are there rules or conditions that must be met in order to go to heaven set forth by Allah?

Yes there are. However, man proposes, Allah disposes. Allah is fully capable of bending His own rules if He wants to, but we have no way of knowing when, why, or for whom those rules will be bent.

Many people confuse closeminded with uncompromising. I'm not closeminded. I can listen and tolerate other people's views. I think that many of them are intelligent opinions, and I'm glad that people have the right to choose how they think.
But just because I think it's intelligent, I'm not going to immediately change my opinion. And if I think my opinion is right (which is obvious, because if I didn't, I wouldn't be of that opinion) I'm not going to pretend that you're right just to make you happy.

If I'm right, and you're wrong, my not saying you're wrong doesn't make you any less wrong. Nor does my pretending you might be right actually make you right. So regardless of who is actually right, we both think we're right.

In an argument, I don't start out by saying, YOU ARE WRONG! I just state my opinion. Usually, they only arguments I bother to get into are about the Bible. So, I state my opinion. Often times, though, people think they Bible says something it doesn't, or they think Christianity says something it doesn't, or something like that. In that case, it's not up to opinion; it's fact. And I correct their facts. Unfortunately, people seem to get this "opinion mode" and act like I'm a horrible person for telling someone else they're wrong. Well, if they're wrong, they're wrong.


Simply: If you think 2+2=5, you're and idiot, and while you're entitled to your opinion, you're wrong, and I am under no obligation to pretend that you might be right. Openminded doesn't mean I have to think you're right, or allow you the possibility of being right. Openminded means that I consider your opinion, think about it. I can choose not to believe it and still be openminded. Closeminded people are those people who refuse to even consider it.
2+2=5...I considered...I thought about it. And I have found it to be wrong.

Faith: Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

In both Judaism and Islam, that faith comes of questioning. We are commanded to learn, to question, and to argue (even if that means arguing with the Allmighty). We believe that learning about science and the natural world is a way of learning about Allah - why do you think we (Muslims) invented Algebra, the astrolabe, built the world's first observatories, studied anatomy and medicine, built some of the largest and most comprehensive libraries in the world, and made scientific advances in astonomy, medicine, and physics in the 9th to 14th centuries that are still in wide use today?

Atheists do not have a lock on knowledge. Even Isaac Newton was a devoted Christian.

I hope you do not think I am infereing that only atheist have a lock on knowledge. You can have faith in God or Allah and still want to see how things are put together or technological advances.

My only point is to show that Atheist have no faith but rather just belief and they are not one in the same.
There can be men of great minds that have faith.

Faith: Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

In both Judaism and Islam, that faith comes of questioning. We are commanded to learn, to question, and to argue (even if that means arguing with the Allmighty). We believe that learning about science and the natural world is a way of learning about Allah - why do you think we (Muslims) invented Algebra, the astrolabe, built the world's first observatories, studied anatomy and medicine, built some of the largest and most comprehensive libraries in the world, and made scientific advances in astonomy, medicine, and physics in the 9th to 14th centuries that are still in wide use today?

Atheists do not have a lock on knowledge. Even Isaac Newton was a devoted Christian.

It would be a much better world if al religious fanatics followed the actual precepts of their religions. Unfortunately they do not often do so. You state that "we believe", which actually is "we are supposed to believe". Many religious people have been great scientists, there is no contradiction there. Western civilization owes an unmeasurable debt of gratitude to the scholarly attitudes of some muslims during the Eurpean dark ages. That should be more widely recognised.

However not all religious people are like this. You cite Newton as being a devoted Christian, in some senses he was, in others he was an alchemist. To associate religious belief with scientific achievement is to look at parallels circumstances as being causal. Religious belief and scientific ability are, to me, completely independent. At times one hinders the other (Einstein's famous denail of God playing craps) but not often.

Atheism is not a religion, nor necessarily a faith. I am an atheist, but this is not a matter of belief with me, it is a matter of reason. There is an underlying belief, that of the universe being no more complex than is necessary to explain the phenomena. This belief eliminates God, unless there is evidence that only such a postulate can explain.

I hope you do not think I am infereing that only atheist have a lock on knowledge. You can have faith in God or Allah and still want to see how things are put together or technological advances.

My only point is to show that Atheist have no faith but rather just belief and they are not one in the same.
There can be men of great minds that have faith.

Main Entry: faith
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: trust
Synonyms: acceptance, allegiance, assent, assurance, belief, certainty, certitude, confidence, constancy, conviction, credence, credit, credulity, dependence, faithfulness, fealty, fidelity, hope, loyalty, reliance, stock, store, sureness, surety, troth, truth, truthfulness
Antonyms: dubiosity, skepticism
Source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.1.1)
Copyright © 2005 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

Religious belief and scientific ability are, to me, completely independent.

Ok ... well let me rephrase, then. It depends on the religion. Qur'an commands Muslims to learn all about science and mathematics, etc etc. Then again, though, Islam does not cling to a 6,000 year old Earth idea nor does it preclude the idea of other planets, other systems, an expanding Universe, etc. Muslims have never believed in the flat earth as center of the universe ideaology. Ignorance is actually a sin in Islam.

We do believe there is nothing in this Universe that Allah did not create, hence, if we know calculus, it is because Allah put it here for us to discover.

I personaly have seen just as many narrow minded, for example, Pagans, who freak out if you make fun of their religion. I have seen many, many, narrow minded atheists.
(Funny story, there was a thing on the Discovery channel a while back trying to explain Moses in scientific/historical terms. Apparently a chance wind and an erupting volcano at the same time caused the Red/reed Sea to part, at the exact time the Jews got there, and close right after they got out. Amazing, eh?)
And of course, there are narrow minded Christians. The sort of Catholic who follows every single one of the Popes commandments, plus the original ones, plus everything in the Bible, the the greatest possible extent.
The sort of Baptist who does everything his local Evangelist says without pause, including the 'Go forth, and kill the man of dark skin!'.
Basicaly every 'religion' has its nuts, go figure.

Originally Posted by Autocraticama
Faith is believing in something. it has nothing to do with a higher power. I have faith that there is a god.

athiestw have faith that their is no god.

Not all atheists have faith that god does not exist. Many simply lack the faith that god does exist. The first type is called "strong atheism." The second type is called "weak atheism."
The difference between weak atheism and agnosticism is that weak atheists claim that faith in God (or faith in no god) is unsound philosophically and epistimologically, whereas agnostics make no claims about the soundness of belief in God, belief in no god, and unbelief in god.

Main Entry: faith
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: trust
Synonyms: acceptance, allegiance, assent, assurance, belief, certainty, certitude, confidence, constancy, conviction, credence, credit, credulity, dependence, faithfulness, fealty, fidelity, hope, loyalty, reliance, stock, store, sureness, surety, troth, truth, truthfulness
Antonyms: dubiosity, skepticism
Source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.1.1)
Copyright © 2005 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.


Yes they are synonyms?? Your point being? They are not the same there are different definitions for each word. They are similar is all.

You cannot use all those words that are synonyms in the same application.

Faith: Unquestioned belief specifically in God or in religon.

They have different uses and applications. Though similar not exact. They are not replacable in all instances.

Ok ... well let me rephrase, then. It depends on the religion. Qur'an commands Muslims to learn all about science and mathematics, etc etc. Then again, though, Islam does not cling to a 6,000 year old Earth idea nor does it preclude the idea of other planets, other systems, an expanding Universe, etc. Muslims have never believed in the flat earth as center of the universe ideaology. Ignorance is actually a sin in Islam.

We do believe there is nothing in this Universe that Allah did not create, hence, if we know calculus, it is because Allah put it here for us to discover.

Fair enough, this gives me more respect for Islam than for some other religions. However it still requires that you take some positive statements purely on faith. To me this is still a little close minded. However, that is my personal position, and I am sure, that in the image of others I am equally close minded, by refusing this possibility.

We, as humans, have to be somewhat close minded to be able to function. Without some form of fixed belief we would be in perpetual doubt about everything. No some fixed beliefs are more exclusive than others. It apears that Islam is one of the less exclusive in its rela demands. Nevertheless there are many people who use Islam as a pretext to bigotry and prejudice. There are also many Christians who use their religion the same way, the same for judaism. The same for science (I regard rationalistic science as a religion, in this sense).
Ignorance should be a sin in all religions, however only a few religious leaders actually make this clear.

I am an atheist, but this is not a matter of belief with me, it is a matter of reason. There is an underlying belief, that of the universe being no more complex than is necessary to explain the phenomena.

And this "underlying belief" is your faith. This illustrates the shortcoming I often see in atheists that hinders their ability to intellectually understand their belief. They are so dead-set against faith that they put too much, well, faith in logic and reason, not understanding the limits of reason. Without faith, logic and reason cannot even begin.

And this "underlying belief" is your faith. This illustrates the shortcoming I often see in atheists that hinders their ability to intellectually understand their belief. They are so dead-set against faith that they put too much, well, faith in logic and reason, not understanding the limits of reason. Without faith, logic and reason cannot even begin.

I recognise that this is my faith.
However it has nothing to do with God or no God, which is the argument usually made against atheists.
I am an atheist but not free of belief. The only way to be free of belief is to not exist as a conscious entity.

I understand atehism as being a - theism. No belief in god, not no faith in anything.

Originally Posted by Alien Born
There is an underlying belief, that of the universe being no more complex than is necessary to explain the phenomena.

Atheists need not even believe this. A person can believe that some things are completely unexplainable without trying to explain them with a "god of the gaps." For instance, many atheists think that physics will never have a grand unified theory because they think that the point at which gravity was the same as the other forces was before one Planck time after the big bang. However, they don't claim to know anything about this unknowable.

What really bothers me about many theists' arguments is that they use quantum mechanics to fit God in places we can't possibly understand, and therefore can't prove or disprove. The argument generally goes like this:
1. Physics (the hardest of sciences) now concludes, through quantum mechanics that we cannot know some things given the current limits of our measuring ability.
2. Because we cannot know these things, science cannot explain them.
3. Therefore, I will explain them.
4. The unknowable nature of the behavior of sub-atomic particles is God acting on the physical universe in ways we can't understand.
5. Therefore, God exists.

In religion as the rest of my life it comes down to: I can afford to be norrow minded, I am right!
:p :sniper: :cool:
Of course my wife and some of my friends like to argue that but we all know that the translation for the name Michael is: Like unto God. so.......
:eek:

I love you atheists! you can not believe in God because he is something more powerful and controlling than you could possibly be! Yet you can believe in some big bang where everything just mystereously came into being from nothing with no one to create it. What an empty existance. My wife and I each have fav. sayings: 1. (hers-I dont totally agree with it but here you go) if we are all made up of chemicals that just magically came into existance as a lifeform shouldnt we be able to put all the components for a goldfish in a bowl add an electric charge and we should get a goldfish! 2. (mine) The odds of evolution actually occouring are along the lines of a twister going thru an airplane graveyard and putting together a perfectly functioning 747.

Atheists need not even believe this. A person can believe that some things are completely unexplainable without trying to explain them with a "god of the gaps." For instance, many atheists think that physics will never have a grand unified theory because they think that the point at which gravity was the same as the other forces was before one Planck time after the big bang. However, they don't claim to know anything about this unknowable.

What really bothers me about many theists' arguments is that they use quantum mechanics to fit God in places we can't possibly understand, and therefore can't prove or disprove. The argument generally goes like this:
1. Physics (the hardest of sciences) now concludes, through quantum mechanics that we cannot know some things given the current limits of our measuring ability.
2. Because we cannot know these things, science cannot explain them.
3. Therefore, I will explain them.
4. The unknowable nature of the behavior of sub-atomic particles is God acting on the physical universe in ways we can't understand.
5. Therefore, God exists.


Even an atheist needs some place to stand. There is something there, at the bottom of your system of explanation which is pure faith. Mine I have stated explicitly. For others it can be things like, the universe exists. (Unjustifiable by any means)

This is not a matter of a God, but of placing unjustified belief in something. You can be an atheist but you still have to have faith in at least one of your principles.

1. Physics (the hardest of sciences) now concludes, through quantum mechanics that we cannot know some things given the current limits of our measuring ability.

Actually it states that some things are impossible to know, regardless of the quality of our measuring ability. So in essence it puts a bit of a damper on the whole omniscience thing ;)

I love you atheists! you can not believe in God because he is something more powerful and controlling than you could possibly be! Yet you can believe in some big bang where everything just mystereously came into being from nothing with no one to create it. What an empty existance. My wife and I each have fav. sayings: 1. (hers-I dont totally agree with it but here you go) if we are all made up of chemicals that just magically came into existance as a lifeform shouldnt we be able to put all the components for a goldfish in a bowl add an electric charge and we should get a goldfish! 2. (mine) The odds of evolution actually occouring are along the lines of a twister going thru an airplane graveyard and putting together a perfectly functioning 747.

No. I don't care if your image of this thing that you denominate God is big and powerful. I simply have no need in my understanding of my experience for some external father figure causing everything and putting it all together.

I can respect your belief, without agreeing to it. Why do you find it so hard to do this with others. If you do not want to consider the empirical evidence that is before you for some ideas, fine don't consider it. Your choice. I however have chosen to give some importance to how thw world affects me, and how this can justify or not some beliefs.

Of course being narrow-minded is a good thing. As long as your narrowed in on what's right, of course.

The Bible does say straight and narrow is the good path and wide is bad, so there.

Ignorance should be a sin in all religions, however only a few religious leaders actually make this clear.

Well, to hear the Apocrypha tell it, being ignorant isn't a sin so much as if you choose to be ignorant you can go wallow in misery while those around you prosper:

Precious jewels could not equal her worth; beside Wisdom all the gold in the world is a handful of sand, and silver is nothing more than clay. I valued her more than health and good looks. Hers is a brightness that never grows dim, and I preferred it to any other light. When Wisdom came to me, all good things came with her. She brought me untold riches. I was happy with them all, because Wisdom had brought them to me. I had not realized before that she was the source of all these things. I was sincere in learning from her, and now I am glad to share what I learned. No one can ever exhaust the treasures of Wisdom. Use those treasures and you are God's friends; he approves of what you learn from her.

Most of the people of faith I know believe that there are many ways to live life and be satisfied spiritually, but that if you follow the "love thy neighbor" principle you'll probably be alright in the end, whatever that end might be.

Fair enough, this gives me more respect for Islam than for some other religions. However it still requires that you take some positive statements purely on faith. To me this is still a little close minded. However, that is my personal position, and I am sure, that in the image of others I am equally close minded, by refusing this possibility.

We, as humans, have to be somewhat close minded to be able to function. Without some form of fixed belief we would be in perpetual doubt about everything. No some fixed beliefs are more exclusive than others. It apears that Islam is one of the less exclusive in its rela demands. Nevertheless there are many people who use Islam as a pretext to bigotry and prejudice. There are also many Christians who use their religion the same way, the same for judaism. The same for science (I regard rationalistic science as a religion, in this sense).
Ignorance should be a sin in all religions, however only a few religious leaders actually make this clear.

Question, do you researh everything that everyone tells you to make sure it is true. Do you research everything you read. If you don;t, you illustate a fair amount of faith in that person, or in the writings.

Question, do you researh everything that everyone tells you to make sure it is true. Do you research everything you read. If you don;t, you illustate a fair amount of faith in that person, or in the writings.

Yes I do have consider that humanity in general has good will. This is however based on some evidence: the people I know. This includes myself, my family, extended as well as close, my colleagues, the people I meet in the street, the people that I have associated with in my life to date. Not all of these have been honest and wel intentioned. Enough have not that I tend to reserve immediate judgement. However the majority have intended no harm nor have they maliciously misinformed me. I do place faith in my fellow man, but this faith is not unjustified.

Some religious groups are nice and open to everyone, and some are narrow and bigoted. Some more are in between. You can't generalise about these groups.

Could an us vs. them mentality arise? I thought it already had. Log onto www.traditionalvalues.org if you think I'm wrong. The Christian rhetoric out there is starting to turn militant. I think this past election has emboldened them, and now they're riding that "political capitol" that everyone's been talking about.

Which is odd to me, because I always thought Christianity was a belief based on acceptance. I mean, Jesus had his moments, but overall, he was a pretty cool and tolerant guy. So why are most of the Christians I know so rigid? Apparently, I'm either with them or against them. All this time I thought I was just kind of a non-issue to them. But I was wrong. My soul is evidently in jeopardy.

For those liberals/atheists out there, if you haven't checked this out already, do so:
www.evilbible.com

For those liberals/atheists out there, if you haven't checked this out already, do so:
www.evilbible.com

Why? The Bible is actually irrelevant if I am an atheist,and what does Evil mean to me, nothing. Bad means something, immoral means something, but Evil? No, an atheist does not use the term except when meeting religious people on their ground.

Faith is believing in something. it has nothing to do with a higher power. I have faith that there is a god.

athiestw have faith that their is no god.

Faith, in the religious sense, has a great deal more to it than simplistic 'believing in something.'

The New Oxford English Dictionary puts it concisely:
1 Confidence, reliance, belief esp. without evidence or proof.
b Belief based on testimony or authority.
2 What is or should be believed; a system of firmly-held beliefs or principles; a religion.
3 Theolgy: Belief in the doctrines of a religion, esp. such as affects character and conduct.
b The spiritual apprehension of divine truth or intangible realities.

Taking them from last-to-first (since the last is the explicitly theological definition):

3 -- Atheism plainly cannot be a 'spiritual apprehension of divine truth,' since there is no divinity involved; nor does atheism address 'intangible realities,' since it is a dismissal of claims of such intangibles. Atheism is not a 'faith' by this definition.

2 -- I cannot think of any atheist who argues or believes that atheism is what 'should be believed,' regardless of whether it's true -- it would be absurd to argue that one ought to disbelieve in God if one considered the opposite likely true. (On the other hand, Pascal's Wager, concocted to try to convince people they should behave as if there's a God regardless of the truth of the belief, if considered with all the theological possibilities and not in the limited, binary 'either Our Catholic God is true or there's no God at all' way Pascal framed it, makes a good case for at least adopting a neutral stance on the existence of any particular Deity.) Atheism is not a 'faith' by definition 2.

1 -- 'Faith' in the religious sense is definition 'b' here -- unless you have come to your belief in God in a societal vacuum, your faith is based largely upon the testimony or authority of others (a good Protestant Evangelical Christian must, to believe the doctrines of his Church, have faith in a very long list of people people who have intervened between the laying down of the Word of God to Moses or through Christ and the receiving of that Word by the 21st Century Christian). I am sure there are some atheists who are atheists because it's the way they were brought up... but very few. Most atheists came to that conclusion on their own, probably considering the arguments put forward by other atheist, but certainly not taking them on authority. Atheism is not a 'faith' by this definition.

The simplist definition: 'Confidence, reliance, belief esp. without evidence or proof.' Maybe, at a stretch, you can reduce atheism to this definition. Not at all logically -- lack of belief in something is not semantically equal to belief in the something's opposite, especially belief or disbelief in the absence of evidence or proof. But in doing so, and explicitly equating religious Faith and atheistic 'faith,' you have reduced by definition your own Faith in God.

And ultimately, reducing religious Faith to this shoddy definition in order to put it on an equal footing with atheism dismisses the value of religious faith. Faith in God can be a noble (in unreasoned) belief (usually in the sense of definition 2 -- by motivating positive behavior). But the way you've just defined it -- any old belief whatever -- utterly devalues religious faith. By this contorted definition, your faith in God is no different from your (presumed) faith that there is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy.

And I don't believe in any of them. That's not faith; just reason.

Faith, in the religious sense, has a great deal more to it than simplistic 'believing in something.'

The New Oxford English Dictionary puts it concisely:
1 Confidence, reliance, belief esp. without evidence or proof.
b Belief based on testimony or authority.
2 What is or should be believed; a system of firmly-held beliefs or principles; a religion.
3 Theolgy: Belief in the doctrines of a religion, esp. such as affects character and conduct.
b The spiritual apprehension of divine truth or intangible realities.


2 -- I cannot think of any atheist who argues or believes that atheism is what 'should be believed,' regardless of whether it's true -- it would be absurd to argue that one ought to disbelieve in God if one considered the opposite likely true. (On the other hand, Pascal's Wager, concocted to try to convince people they should behave as if there's a God regardless of the truth of the belief, if considered with all the theological possibilities and not in the limited, binary 'either Our Catholic God is true or there's no God at all' way Pascal framed it, makes a good case for at least adopting a neutral stance on the existence of any particular Deity.) Atheism is not a 'faith' by definition 2.


You have only addressed half of the disjunction given in the definition
What is or should be believed;
You have completely ignored what is believed.

I am an atheist, as I have made clear on numerous occasions here (Both this thread and NS general in general?!). I do have things I believe. I laso find it very difficult indeed to see how anyone can function at all with no beliefs.
Do you check, before each step, that the ground you are about to step on is really there? No, you believe your senses. You can have no reason for this (there are none available), other than faith in your senses.
There are hundreds of similar examples. Your every activity depends upon belief somewhere.

Originally Posted by Omega the Black
2. (mine) The odds of evolution actually occouring are along the lines of a twister going thru an airplane graveyard and putting together a perfectly functioning 747.

Well, it is the nature of atoms to bond to one another when they collide. The way in which they bond often produces compounds that react with their environment by bonding with other atoms or simpler compounds, then releasing these atoms or compounds as a whole. Sometimes, this whole is the same as the original compound to which the atoms and other compounds were binding. In this case, natural forces have produced a reproducing compound or mixture, a life. Air plane parts do not do this.

Your comparison is therefore invalid. It is like saying that because the book Finances for Dummies helped me with my finances, the book Chess for Dummies by the same author and publisher will also help me with my finances. (This example is from the University of Tennessee at Martin website.)

Calvanism isn't a religeon. being a baptist doesn't mean you have a different religion. It just means that those specific groups translate the bible differently without changing the passages (Jehova's Witnesses change the test of John for it to read that the bible is a God, but that isn;t pertinent here).

I think that is very pertinent -- if 'without changing passages' within the Bible is your definition of belonging to the same religion, then Protestants and Catholics have different religions.

The Protestant translations of the Bible omit some seven books of the Old Testament (Septuagint) and delete parts of two others (Esther and Daniel) found in Catholic and Orthodox translations? (And the Orthodox Churches include four more books and an additional Psalm.)

Removing an entire book is 'changing passages' in the extreme, don't you think? If Jehovah's Witnesses have changed the Bible enough to be of a different religion, then so have Protestants and Orthodox varied from Roman Catholic Religion enough to qualify as different religions.

(Protestant versions use as their Old Testament Jewish Scripture as revised by by Jewish scholars in about 100 AD -- after the time of Christ. The books Christ would have recognized and presumably accepted as Scripture that are rejected by Protestant are: Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), 1 and 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, and Baruch.)

But the Dictionary is our friend and wisely consulted before declaring that another person's usage of a word is incorrect:

(From the Oxford English Dictionary):
Religion (n.)
1 A state of life bound by religious vows; the condition of belonging to a religious order, esp. in the Roman Catholic Church.
2 A particular monastic or religious order or rule. Now rare. ME.

Simply belonging to a particular religious order (e.g. Jesuit, Franciscan) qualifies as a 'religion' -- different sects certainly do.

3 Belief in or sensing of some superhuman controlling power or powers
... or in a system defining a code of living...
... the expression of this in worship etc... in pl., religious rites.
4 A particular system of such belief.

Particular systems or expression of belief and worship, religious rites -- all are quite different in different sects or 'religions' among the overall Christian theology, though I would say 'sect' is the more accurate word (though sect can include factions regarded as heretical, and therefore would include Jehovah's Witnesses, by your usage).

This is not insultive and not intended to be such. Definintions of narrow-minded.

lacking tolerance or flexibility or breadth of view; "a brilliant but narrow-minded judge"; "narrow opinions"
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

<snip>

If they are narrow-minded is that necessarily a bad thing?


This is an interesting question. I was watching a panel discussion on a PBS station the other day about the flap over the episode of a children's TV show that featured lesbian parents ('Travels With Buster,' I think is the show). Among the guests was a conservative priest (I think he was Episcopalian, but he may have been Roman Catholic -- they also had a liberal Episcopal priest). The conservative priest wanted to insist that he was not 'intolerant' -- intolerance has become such a synonym for bigoted and bad that he had to assert that he wasn't such a bad person.

And while I don't think the priest was bad, he certainly was being 'intolerant' -- he was stating that 'we' (Society, Christians, etc.) should not 'tolerate' expression of a viewpoint on a religious/moral issue contrary to his own.

Interestingly, the program had apparently previously shown Jewish and even Muslim families, without arousing any ire of Christian clerics. The program could present parents who were raising their children to reject the fundamental tenet of Christianity, and of this the conservative (narrow-minded -- not intended perjoratively here) Christians were tolerant. It was a depiction of a family who might have been other Christians -- of people Christians might consider emulating -- who were rejecting what some Christian sects regard as a tenet of their Faith, that incited intolerance.

I don't necessarily think being 'narrow-minded' or overly flexible in one's convictions is always a bad thing -- no point in having convictions if you're going to change them to suit others or the current fashion, after all. 'Those who stand for nothing fall for anything,' as Alexander Hamilton said. As someone else posted, they (and I) are 'intolerant of genocide.' I can think of quite a number of behaviors about which I am not 'broad-minded' and accepting.

The line (I draw quite narrowly! ;) ) is intolerance over the expression of contrary views. I do think that's a bad thing. The narrow-minded will argue that tolerance of an alternative viewpoint will lead to acceptance of it. I think they're often right -- and that's exactly why intolerance of censorship should not be.... er, tolerated. No value system has the right to prevail by silencing (possibly better) alternative systems; a narrow-mindedness that tries to keep others ignorant of contrary opinion is, indeed, a bad thing.

To quote H.L. Mencken: 'All human progress, even in morals, has been the work of men who have doubted the current moral values, not of men who have whooped them up and tried to enforce them.'