Religion can either be described as 'the belief in a supernatural power', or merely 'a strong set of beliefs'. Thus is could be argued whether or not Atheism qualifies as a religion, but I consider it one.

Daganev, I'm not sure why you think humans are so different to other animals. We're slightly more advanced in, say, the capacity of the brain to reason and so forth than other animals, but really, is there any good reason other than pride and a few scattered pieces of evidence that prove we're different to other animals that we're "not just animals?" I mean, platypi are mammals that lay eggs. They're still mammals, aren't they?

Im sure that is what you said that got you grounded.

With your definition Shiri, Judaism is not a religion, but for the sake of the sanity of people everywhere Jews allow it to be called such.

Aethism is a religion. Its most fundemental belief is that G-d does not exist. Ofcourse, you then have to define what "god" doesn't exist, which god are you rejecting? Because in Jewish thought, Gravity is but another angel of G-d's. Every math equation is but another Seraph.

A "Bible" is usually a book that describes the general beliefs of a person, and is the foundation book on how one lives thier life. If you do not base your life or your actions on any religious ideas, then you get your ideas from Society. The Study of Society is Sociology, which is a science. Just because you don't read physics books or biology books or Pyschology books or Sociology books to get your views, does not mean you are not using those sciences in the same way a religious person uses thier Bible.

Ok, Shiri, sorry, but I really don't think you have any right to tell people what they know. I know there is a God, THE God. I know what He did for me. Raan knows what He did for him. This topic is about how the world was created not the other aspects of religion.

Seriously...the worst thing you can do is tell someone they don't know their own beliefs.


Daganev...wow, that's a...different view on it all.

I'm wondering if you believe in everything you posted or were sharing something you've heard.

Humans are FAR different from other animals, mentally. Humans operate on logic, reason, and thought. Animals rely on instinct.

"I think, therefore I am." We know that we know. Animals only know.

A Creationist worldview is ignorant of scientific theory. I'm not sure who started using the word naive, but since I called Alyvia ignorant, not naive, I'll assume you thought I meant them the same way.

I do not.

I'm sure Alyvia is not a naive individual. She seems to be able to at least hold a coherent conversation. She just does not seem particularly strongly educated in the relevant fields to be able to argue the points well enough. The same is true of the vast majority of Creationists. Whether this is a fault of their nature or their nurture is different in different circumstances, but ultimately one cannot make a coherent case for Creationism without invoking self-fulfilling axioms that are to this debate what many higher order mathematics are to the engineering community...Interesting, but ultimately of little use to anything that matters.

Actually, I used to be Christian. Then I came to realise it didn't really make any sense. I had faith, now I do not. I do understand. I simply disagree.


Nor is it right for you to claim myopia just because you disagree with something without having any real evidence. And I know latter day saints aren't the same as protestants. Does it matter?


This is actually wrong. For you to try and guess our motives for disbelieving in something by explaining it away as fear of you being right and being unable to accept it is far worse than any argument we've been using, even those along the same vein.


And I'd like to see more of this. I admire both Daganev's and Rexali's arguments, though I happen to disagree with Daganev.



Plenty of us have ideas of what it is to be like. We've both been in each other's positions, in fact. So the argument that we don't know is simply incorrect.

Why does this remind me of Brona?

I'm not sure where this idea that I need a right to hold my own opinion comes from. I believe in a scientific explanation of things, you believe in a religious explanation of things. NEITHER of us "knows" them for certain. There is no way to prove with 100% certainty that this is so. Unless we're just using different definitions of the word "know?" And to be honest, Alyvia, by claiming that you know something like that for certain, you're claiming that every other opinion must be wrong, since yours is right, because you know it. So aren't you doing the exact same thing?

So far I've been posting things I believe in I think. The truth is I believe in many things which all fit into a system I called Judaism.

The Cliche "Two Jews, Three Opinions" is not a cliche on the argumentivie nature of a Jewish person, but rather a cliche on the fact that our belief structure can often have 2 opposing views both be considered Divine Truth.

No, the flood was 4,000 years ago, according to the Bible. Which is why the oldest desert is that old, oldest tree is that old. Kinda hard to have a desert under so much water, eh?

I don't have the figures on me, I'll look for em, but there's a lot of evidence, not just the Bible that the world is only 6,000 years old.

Not so. I could, for example, say that all of your beliefs are wrong. I know them to be wrong, and I am right. You are wrong. That is a fact.

If you cannot say that to someone who believes something else, then you don't really believe in anything yourself. If you say, "This is my belief, but hey, your's might be right! I could be wrong", you have just lost all validity.

Shiri, I let everyone keep their opinions, it wont change what I claim. And yes, what I claim does mean that every other opinion would be wrong, thats why its generally useless to debate the issue between Scientologists, and Theologists.



As blatantly anal as Guido sounds, he is right. There is no middle ground. One is right, the other is wrong. There are no "ifs". Once again, why it is stupid to argue the point. However it provides for intresting conversations as long as the select few can keep from attacking others personal beliefs.

This isn't entirely true, actually. Organisms on a variety of developmental levels (though most examples are of mammals) have been shown to exhibit a reliable sense of self awareness. The ability for humans to separate themselves above other species so readily is due in large part to survival mechanisms we acquired early in our speciation which are just scaled up versions of the same self awareness exhibited by animals. Our instincts are just as present as they are in animals, we've simply come to rely on them less and less because we have the intelligence necessary to have that -option- in the first place.

And vice versa.

A creationist world view is not ignorant of Scientific theory, it merely holds that the current scientific theory is wrong, but it just so happens that the only better explanation they can give is religious in nature.

The list of why Humans are not just another animal is ... um wow, its long. Mind you, Humans are part animal. A human is an animal just as a photon is a particle. Sometimes a photon is a Particle, sometimes it is a wave, So to Humans are sometimes Humans and sometimes they are animals.

It is common when two rabbis of the 6th century where having an argument, and thier tempers rose, that one would turn to the other and call him a "Behama" or an Animal. This was considered an insult that would send a wince through the audience.

I'm just wondering how you all answer the question "Who am I?" I believe I was made by God for a purpose, my life has meaning. If you believe that your just an accident of nature does it really matter how you live your life?

Pop quiz: How many of you people actually know what B.I.B.L.E. means?

I'd just like to mention, to lower the tension around here, that I CANNOT see or hear the word 'scientology' without laughing my ass off.

Just look at it!

Thanks for the sarky last question there. Unless it wasn't, in which case apologies for presuming.

And you know, reading into your question, yes, it does matter how we live our lives. I assume you're referring to why we don't just go and do whatever we want and then you'd expect to see some huge rise in crime or something? Well, we don't think like that. At least, I don't. I like to see other people happy. Or I get endorphins and pleasure and whatever scientific terms you want to put on it, when other people are happy. Therefore I try and make people happy. Makes sense?
Strictly, though, no, there's no meaning to life, nor to how you live it. But that only means there's no purpose, not that we're soulless fiends that have no morality. It's simply self-defined.