There a few things here…

1.       It’s almost impossible to say anything critical about religion without sounding angry or “militant” as I’ve often been accused of by others. People are just not used to hearing religion being spoken of in a bad light when in their minds religion is a pink and fluffy organization that helps poor people and widows…

2.       Religion is NOT a pink and fluffy organization that helps poor people and widows. Certainly there are individuals both in and out of religion with a humanistic bent (which is great for the world), but that’s not how religion is set up. Religion is at its core anti reason, anti-science, anti-female, anti-sex and many other things which make it more of a disease for humanity than a help.

3.       My fight is with the system, and not the people. I have Christian friends who are great and I love them. But sometimes in the fight against the system certain leaders and prominent figures will be targeted for ridicule because of their role in upholding and furthering the cause of religious craziness.

4.       People like yourself who have not had a strong religious indoctrination won’t necessarily have the same distaste for religion because they haven’t seen the carnage first hand. Although I know many lifelong Atheists who are as passionate as I am about closing down the religious structures and moving toward a more reasonable, thoughtful, peaceful, secular world.

Thanks for reading my blog. I hope you listen to the podcast too (Primordial Soup).

I’m sure we’ll chat again.

Deon

Just wanted to say thanks for the interesting read. Your blogs on stopping religions were fascinating. I don’t have a dying urge to argue/agree/disgree with anything you have written (I read purely for the enjoyment of seeing other peoples perspectives)

As you seem to be a man that is great in expressing himself I was hoping you could help me out with something I have been thinking about. Some of my friends as well as people I have met in passing who come from the same background as yourself, strict religious upbringing, that are now very opposed to religions, why is that they are so completely against religion? Its like comparing ex smokers who whine more about smokers that people who never smoked at all?
I was not brought up religious and was rather left to try them all and pick what appealed to me. I just find it interesting that they are so much more aggressive/passionate in being anti religion than those that have not been through the apparently traumatic ordeal of church.

Anyway your thoughts would be appreciated.

Mathematics is the primary language of Science, but we certainly proves things (usually relationships) in science.

Obvious examples are in Newtonian Physics – we express the relationship in mathematical terms (eg F = mA, v = At + V0, s = At^2 + V0t + S0), we then create experiments to test / prove / validate these relationships.

In the even that we otice something inconsistent, a new theory (or a modification of the old one) is then required, one that not only explains the new evidence, but also continues to explains the old evidence. (Sticking with our previous example, we note that at high Velocities, ie Velocities approaching the speed of light, Newton’s equations break drown, and hence Einstein’s theory of Relativitistic Physics was developed that catered for this anomaly, while not being contradictory to the basic Newtonian framework)

Summary: Physics, Biology, Chemistry and any other hard sciences I’ve neglected certainly do prove things, and the language of those proofs is mathematics.

In answer to you Atheist definition (btw, Atheist is a poor term for us – I think “Lunatic” is a better term for religious people than “Theist”, but I use their own term and not a perjorative. Same applies here – “Atheist” implies we’re missing something, being literally “without a god” – stick with “Humanist” or “rationalist” if you need a term) we do not Believe that there is no god – we have seen the hypothesis, and like the pixie fairies of bubblegum forest we have rejected the hypothesis. To be defined by one of the millions of meaningless hypotheses I’ve rejected seems absurd to ms. (Do you believe in Santa Clause? If not, are you an “Asantaist”? How about an “ADentoFaeist” if you’ve rejected the Tooth Fairy myth?. A far better definition of a Rationalist is that we accept what can be shown to be true, and take on faith that which is proven using a methodology we trust. (Yes, there is sadly some element of faith involved – most of us do not understand quantum physics for example, but we trust the scientific principle that has developed it and the Engineers that have applied it to semiconductor theory, powering pretty much every piece of electronics that you use on a daily basis)

-Ed.

“An Atheist is someone who does not believe that a god or gods exists, i.e. God is not real and does not exist.”

Not believing in something is different from the claim that that thing does not exist. So to say “I do not believe in god” is not also to say “god does not exist”. I don’t believe in Russell’s teapot, but I cannot say that it doesnt exist.

“An Agnostic is someone who thinks that God cannot be proven or that we cannot know God, i.e. there is no evidence for God.”

To say that one “cannot” prove (ie: there is no evidence that we could have access to which would have a bearing on the matter) that god exists is different from saying that there is no evidence. To say that something is not subject to standards of proof, evidence, or even truth, is to adopt a kind of mysterianism; or mysticism in the case of religion, not agnosticism.
The agnostic, technically, is one who says “there is no evidence for god, therefore no reason for me to believe in (a) god, therefore I do not believe in god”

If by “cannot prove” you mean “cannot prove with available evidence” then maybe. But then, of course, science isn’t really in the business of “proving” anything (if that’s the kind of model you’re drawing on). You prove things in mathematics, not science.

I pondered whether or not I should comment on this article, but decided to put forth a small piece of my opinion seeing as you seem to be recieving some flack for it.

I think its absolutely great that you are questioning the “status quo” and that everyone should do so, not just once, but continously throughout their life. This is how we learn and evolve.

As for myself, I can honestly say you cannot “box” me in a religion or faith, yet I do “feel” there is something more to life than just birth and death. I like to call this “God /(s)” for the mere convenience, but do not believe it is the end and beginning of what was or is to come, but a comfort (or anger outlet) when confronted with seemingly “unsolvable” issues.

In the end the “right” answer will only be discovered when people do start asking questions, so well done on having the guts to do so!

Keep the great articles coming, I do enjoy having my views challenged by them!

Christ’s teachings are clear – love for friends and enemies, and forgiveness for all. It’s too bad more Christians don’t practice what he taught. In my experience, it’s more of a “do as I say, not as I do” mentality.