cuchulain

I think it is detrimental to any debate to have multiple definitions of the same thing. The energy in the body is called soul by some, chi by some, buddhanature by some, spirit, and so forth...but it's all referencing the same thing while insisting it isn't that thing at all. Without one working definition, it makes the concept difficult to discuss.

I have encountered the original sound idea before in Druidry. It is IAO, according to Iolo Morganwyg. Yeah, I guess it can come off as the search for the perfect label. But for me it isn't. It's simply the most accurate label at this time. It might change, or it might not. And in the end, I tend to live by an axiom most people have heard. "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." It doesn't much matter to me what people call me. I am what I am, regardless of title. Some might even call me a martian, but the truth is not altered by the label placed.

I think the worst misconception of Atheism is the deliberate misinformation pushed by those of the hardheaded nature, who often act as though it were a simple mistake with language. You believe there is no God, vs you don't believe in God. A subtle difference, but one of distinction often in debates with the religious. The first, they can claim I have made a positive statement. "There is no God" is a positive statement, and so when it comes to burden of proof, if that were my position I would need to provide evidence for a negative. The second, "I do not believe in God" does not assert anything to the actual reality or unreality of a divine presence, and therefore I have no need to prove up. Or, the most proof I need to provide is that I truly don't believe in God, which can be tricky with that whole "Written on the heart" thing that Christians insist I really do believe in God, I am just denying it. That's quite simply a load of crap. Then there is the misinformation that Atheists are really working for the devil, or some other ludicrous statement along those lines. Obviously, if we don't believe in God, it isn't very likely we believe in a devil either. I understand that there is a large contingent of Satanists who use the label strictly in the rebellious sense and qualify themselves as Atheists. I suppose this is a subdivision of Atheism that causes some of us minor irritation in dealing with those who believe all Atheists are Satanists. "All squibs are squabs, therefore all squabs must be squibs" kind of fallacy. The short and simple of my Atheism, and I use the term "my" because I feel everyone has the potential for their own brand of it, is that I do not believe God exists. So far as stoicism goes, I am not certain there are misconceptions about it in truth. I haven't come across any, in any case. But again, it's one of those paths that the individual has a tendency to personalize within a few basic tenets.

I was just being humorous...well, maybe failing at being humorous lol.

The question seems very basic I suppose. I thought I would share a little story, kind of an interesting thought to me. My mother died about a year ago. Throughout her entire life with my brother and I, she never brought up religious matters that I can remember. She never took us to church, but if we wanted to go she would give us a little money for the donation box. She never discussed the fallacies of any one group, she never brought anybody else's religion into anything that I can remember. She never talked bad about Atheism, Satanism, Paganism, or Christianity. I really had no clue what religion, if any, she was. I found out about an hour after her death, when we were discussing what kind of funeral service to have with the funeral director, that she was a Druid. Now, through my entire life, I had never considered she might have been what I was. My Grandfather was a devout Christian, non denominational. Meaning whenever I would stay at his house, I went to whatever random church he decided to go to on Sunday. So I rarely stayed over on Saturdays, needless to say. My Grandmother, I realize belatedly, was much like my Mother. She never discussed religious matters, but always went with my Grandfather. I assumed she was Christian, but maybe not? My Father was basically out of the picture for large portions of my life. He was an Army Sergeant for twenty years, and divorced from my Mother from the time I was five. I didn't see him at all between the ages of nine and fifteen, and when he got back I stayed one weekend and decided not to go back due to extremely abusive talk. When I grew up a bit more, I visited occasionally. He was devout Christian. My brother had become a Christian. I ended up an ex Druid, Stoic Atheist. It just all got me thinking about how family influences our religious choices, even when we don't quite realize it. I identified with my Mother for most of my life, probably a lot because she was the one who raised me for the most part. She listened when I talked about religion, she would interject historical perspective to the discussion, and never bad mouth anything. She never piped up and said she agreed or disagreed with my decision to be a Druid. I just find it somewhat remarkable, and amazing.

You might be mistaken about that...but if you are mistaken about us being mistaken, then you aren't mistaken. But if you aren't mistaken, they since you said we are mostly mistaken, it must be a mistake, yes?

That's a real boring science class, but an easy a. "Now kids, how did trees begin? God did it. Now kids, how does it rain? God did it..." Of course, for those who don't believe, they simply fail I suppose. At least, if they give an honest answer.

I have recently wondered about Buddhism, and I suppose differing branches is the explanation. I have read that Buddhists don't believe in a soul. But also in the same book, that they do believe(usually) in reincarnation...but I cannot fathom how a being without a soul could reincarnate. Can anyone clarify for me?

Stoic is slightly different than Atheist. Probably a big part of the confusion is that I am multiple. Stoic is something of a logician. Usually they believe in Logos, something along the lines of universal consciousness? I don't believe in that personally, since I have seen no evidence to convince me it exists. So I also utilize the label Atheist in an attempt to let people know there is a difference.

If people ask what specific religion I am, I use stoic atheist. I follow stoic principles(in my own fashion) and do not believe in God. Most people get hung up on the Atheist label and never remember to ask what a stoic is.

I think the closest thing for me would be a bumper sticker that says live long and prosper...the Vulcans of Star Trek were based on the stoics. But really, I don't think that too many people would go that far in their thinking when they saw it.

I don't know if I believe in Therapeutic touch myself. I haven't examined the evidence for or against, but either way I wouldn't see that as a reason to start clobbering. At most I would simply state my skepticism about it, then examine the evidence to come to my own conclusion. But I do know what you mean about the hardliners. I think we probably have all had encounters with the extremist skeptics.

Freedom of speech is important. Freedom of choice is important. The terms of service were presented before anyone signed up to be on this forum. A part of those terms of service were the profanity filter. I know because I read them. And like everyone else here I agreed to them. I think it silly that someone agreed to terms, then complains about those terms after the fact. That's my personal opinion, though. Take it or not.

If the spiritual realm is not observable, how is it known?

That's about as serious as my son and I took it. The fact that Lucas allowed authors to write stories in his made up universe with the stipulation that they adhere to each others story line was something remarkable to me. But not that remarkable...

I tend to think those who identify as Christians should follow the example of Christ. He could have hid before the Romans came. He could have escaped at any point. He could have wiped out all those who persecuted him, at least according to the mythology. Yet he didn't strike back with violence. I think that pretty well sums up the Christian argument about self defense as well.

On another forum, a person was railing against Islam with all the typical bigoted remarks, things like they are all terrorists, they all repress women and women's rights, they are all killers. Then in a later thread he argued that bombing abortion clinics was alright because they were killers and it was preventing murder. I asked him what the difference was between his views and extremist Muslims. He never responded.

Yep...I don't take it that seriously lol. But then again, some people claim it as their religion, so I assume they take it seriously.

I hadn't considered the canon. It's funny that I hadn't because my oldest son constantly tells me about what is and is not canon anymore, we used to read the books pretty religiously(pun intended). Then the Disney universe did away with all that stuff we had read before, and it kind of made me feel like it was a waste of time reading what used to be canon but what hadn't existed after all...not a complete waste of time, as I had fun reading the stories with my kid, but it really didn't go anywhere in the end.

I have been that Atheist who raged against believers...also that pagan that raged against believers, lol. I think the problem is that it feels like accomplishing something when you can rail at a perceived injustice, or perceived immorality. It feels like doing something about a problem, but in reality it's burying the problem. When I railed against it, it always turned out the same. It was like taking a sledgehammer to a post and slamming it into the ground, all it did was solidify the opponents position. I think that's because it is human nature to dig in defensively. On the topic of the difference, I got to thinking. How many bombings have you heard of involving someone's philosophy, as opposed to someone's religion?

What ever happened to jediism, ummm....not sure how to go about spelling that. I used to hear a lot about it in the news, but I guess the sensation died off. I remember when I was here before there was a member who actively practiced jediism, but I cannot for the life of me remember their name. Just got to wondering...

I am not certain of anything, lol. Fear those who are. So I ask another question along the same thread as this one. Does the differences between religion and philosophy and all that really amount to anything? Or...do the differences actually make any practical difference?

Buddhism teaches the middle way. I think that might apply here. Be nice to people, but not fawning and the sort. Be assertive of yourself, but not hateful or trampling of others in the process. At least, that's how I think I will attempt to do it

My wife and I were eating the other day at Jimmy John's. On our way out, she looks over and says, "ooo...a frozen yogurt shop. Frozen yogurt is the best." To which I immediately reply, "Frozen yogurt sucks." I think this distinguishes things in the communication line quite well. She believed what she was saying, and communicated it effectively. I believed what I said, and I believed it as well. Still, neither of us changed our minds. We understood each other quite well. Didn't matter how much she believed frozen yogurt was the best, I still don't like it. Doesn't matter how much I hate frozen yogurt, she still likes it a lot. And the best part? It doesn't really matter if I don't like it, or she does.

I can appreciate the Christian perspective, Dan. I simply need some observational evidence to go with it before I can consider the biblical verses to be accurate.