[jillianleab]

From wiki:

"Many self-described atheists are skeptical of all supernatural beings and cite a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities."

Being spiritual implies belief in spirits (human spirit, human soul) which would be a supernatural being. I personally have never met an atheist who believes in such things. Lots of people say they are atheists when really, they're agnostic. Regarding your comment about the "energy in the universe that brings enlightenment and awareness" again, you're talking about something supernatural. Sure there's energy in the universe, just not the kind you are describing.

[BMI]

Right on, that's what I was trying to say earlier, but it turned ugly... LOL

[shatteredsoul]

And my point was, what does that have to do with religion??

[jillianleab]

And my point was, what does that have to do with religion???

Because to an atheist there's no difference between religion and spirituality. It's all a bunch of hooey with no scientific backing. If you are an atheist, by definition, you CAN'T believe in the human soul or spirit.

[alkalineangel]

If Karma thinks that you can be truly happy without God, than that of course is incorrect, and if offends than so be it.

You can not say this... this is where you are demeaning others ways that are not your own. You got upset at Excon for him saying that it was pretending and then you go and say something like this. You or no one on earth can tell another person that their beliefs are wrong or incorrect. You do not know beyond a doubt that your way is THE way... you BELIEVE it is... as I have said before in this thread. Belief and fact are two very different things.

I am not atheist, but my husband is, and I understand their beliefs, even though I do not necessarily agree with them... but I will be the last person to tell them they are wrong. I respect others too much.

In my religion we are open to all forms of religion, beliefs, and spiritual enlightenment.
I was raised Christian and was confused, but happy. I am no longer Christian and lead a very happy life as does my family. I don't think either way can be the root of happiness... our actions are the root to this.

[JohnSnownw]

I am philosophically an agnostic, but for all intents and purposes I'm an atheist. One thing I find strange about myself is that I will still knock-on-wood. I do not believe something will happen if I don't, but I do it anyway. My girlfriend, who is quite religious, finds this rather amusing.

Anyway, I agree with the earlier posts, way back on page one, that I simply do not have the capacity to believe. I went to church for 16 years, but never actually remember believing what was preached. Anyway, I just find the whole idea of God (in the Christian sense anyway) absurd. However, I do still knock-on-wood :)

[BMI]

Ahhhhhh, to respond to alkalifgklhflg whatever,

The post was in response two the two previous, it was A SHOT if you will at the previous posters (ex-con & Karma) you see I combined what Karma wrote with what excon wrote, so technically they said those first and are equally as guilty as myself, actually more so. Obviously this has been lost on 2 of you, firsty yourself for jumping into conversations without reading the entire structure, and on Karma who obviously did not notice the word play and yet still casts insults "narrow minded" yet goes completely unaware of her own doings. If u want to start arguments than PLEASE PAY ATTENTION, otherwise u just look bad:(

[NeedKarma]

The narrow-minded comment had nothing to do with the 'wordplay'. It mostly has to do with the impossibilty of understanding how people can be happy for other reasons than believing in your god. I'd like to think we can all get along and my friends and workmates are, well actually I don't know or care what their beliefs are because they are all good, (mostly) happy people regardless of what they believe.

Edit to add: your misspelling of the poster's name on purpose was quite immature.

[shatteredsoul]

I understand that it is all a bunch of hooey, or whatever, to people who are an atheist. However, just as they are so sure that there is nothing other than the existence they are in, so are those that are so convinced that God created the world. The only difference is what each person believes. Athiests have the faith to say this is it, but what else are they going by? NO different than a religious person. Faith in nothing is still faith.
So, my point is, why does everything have to be either or? Why do people have to label themselves in a particular way, or anyone else for that matter. We know one thing, we just don't know where we go when we die, or what happens to us. Can we agree on that? I wasn't attacking what an atheist believes, simply stating that one could be spiritual, without being religious. (label not included) I myself don't live by such strict standards of defining what I think or believe .That is the danger in religion, or in being atheist in my opinion.

NOthing is definite, we all know we are limited in our understanding of this existence. How we choose to perceive it is what makes us unique human beings. How extraordinary life is, no matter how we got here or where we are going.

[BMI]

Quite funny as well, ALSO, perhaps you should not cast insults or slights and then turn around and suggest others are being immature, start a topic on that!

Once again, did I ever write you can only be happy if you believe in God, or did I write you can be HAPPIER believing in God. All the posts refuting my posts are because it seems as if you are trying to make what I'm saying into something you take offence at OR are not reading the structure carefully enough. Either way you are not fully understanding the quite simple point I was saying. AS for this topic, it is over, we will not agree and you will continue to cast insults and misspell peoples names on purpose, so we shall end it here, believe what you would like because I am truly happy for you.

Can we be friends now:)

[NeedKarma]

Shattered,

I do agree with and so did jillianleab when she pointed you towards the term agnostic. Here's a quick definition:

Agnosticism (from the Greek "a," meaning "without," and Gnosticism or "gnosis," meaning knowledge) is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of God, gods, deities, or even ultimate reality—is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the nature of subjective experience.

Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods; or, alternatively, that while individual certainty may be possible, they personally have no knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of skepticism.

[NeedKarma]

Can we be friends now:)

Sure, as long as you're a happy, good person who treats others well. That's my only criteria. :)

[jillianleab]

I understand that it is all a bunch of hooey, or whatever, to people who are an atheist. However, just as they are so sure that there is nothing other than the existence they are in, so are those that are so convinced that God created the world. The only difference is what each person believes. Athiests have the faith to say this is it, but what else are they going by? NO different than a religious person. Faith in nothing is still faith.
So, my point is, why does everything have to be either or? Why do people have to label themselves in a particular way, or anyone else for that matter. We know one thing, we just don't know where we go when we die, or what happens to us. Can we agree on that? I wasn't attacking what an atheist believes, simply stating that one could be spiritual, without being religious. (label not included) I myself don't live by such strict standards of defining what I think or believe .That is the danger in religion, or in being atheist in my opinion.

NOthing is definite, we all know we are limited in our understanding of this existence. How we choose to perceive it is what makes us unique human beings. How extraordinary life is, no matter how we got here or where we are going.

We give labels to things because they help us identify with others. Without labels it's very difficult to discuss things. There is nothing saying someone can't be religious and still be spiritual, but by definition, one cannot be an atheist and be spiritual. In your post (#36) you asked:

Why can an atheist not be spiritual and be connected to the energy in the universe that brings enlightenment and awareness?

I think I've explained why this doesn't work. But yes, someone can not believe in an organized religion and be spiritual. They are not, however, an atheist. They are agnostic, which is quite different.

[shatteredsoul]

Just because labels make it easier to identify others, doesn't mean we all specifically fall into one category. I understand what agnostic is and I thank you for your specific reference to which post, with the definition. I got it.
Let me clarify myself as not confuse any reference to any label you might be referring to.

A person who DEEMS themselves an atheist, may in fact be an AGNOSTIC or may have a inclination to be spiritual or be connected to the energy that is in the universe, that we are all made up of. MAybe that person doesn't believe they can be defined outside of either term, but I am saying they can. That is a opinion and perspective, one that cannot and should not be determined in finality by anyone else. It is more determined by life experiences. But I appreciate your clarification. I am hoping you can see past the vocabulary words to understand the intent of what I am saying.

[alkalineangel]

Ahhhhhh, to respond to alkalifgklhflg whatever,

The post was in response two the two previous, it was A SHOT if you will at the previous posters (ex-con & Karma) you see i combined what Karma wrote with what excon wrote, so technically they said those first and are equally as guilty as myself, actually moreso. Obviously this has been lost on 2 of you, firsty yourself for jumping into conversations without reading the entire structure, and on Karma who obviously did not notice the word play and yet still casts insults "narrow minded" yet goes completely unaware of her own doings. If u want to start arguments than PLEASE PAY ATTENTION, otherwise u just look bad:(

Honey, Ive been here from the beginning, maybe you should be the one to go back and re-read. And YOU were the one who said what you said "that of course is incorrect", that was a quote from your own post, pointing blame other places does not do you justice.

[BMI]

Another post another mistake, I wrote it in response to one previous to me NOT written by me, if I knew how to quote I would. Nevertheless, speaking too soon does not do you justice:)

[alkalineangel]

You did not quote Karma, you took what you wanted to say and added a phrase he said..

From Karma's post:

The issue is that you profess only you can only be truly happy if you believe in God. That of course is incorrect. There are a lot in very unhappy believers in God, what the hell happened to them?

There is the difference... You used his line to prove your point, therefore it became Your words...

Your words...

Fair enough my man, I guess we can cool it on that point, If Karma thinks that you can be truly happy without God, than that of course is incorrect, and if offends than so be it.

Karma would not have said what you typed... no mistake, you are just trying to twist things. Karma said that you are incorrect to assume that the only way to be truly happy is to follow god...

You said that he is incorrect that you can be happy without God, and that is not quite the same as he said, therefore... not a quote.

... and speaking too soon?

[BMI]

Writing speaking to soon?? Suggests you have somehow proven me wrong, that's how a stick works, you prove the other wrong, you don't just write it when you THINK your right.

Karma wrote it in relation to believing in God makes you more happy, she is saying that this in incorrect, which would be no more correct than me writing it is incorrect to say otherwise. SO we can establish that if I am being insulting to the unbeleiving than they too are being equally insulting to the beleiver. By mixing the two phrases of each of them, it makes that point more noticeable by using their own words against them in that context. I never said it was a quote, Karma did not write what I wrote exatly and I never said she did, so where does the quote that you are saying is not a quote come from??

[NeedKarma]

she

He.

[alkalineangel]

First of all, I did not write "speaking to soon???" to imply you were wrong, I simply did not see the relevance of putting it into your post, I didn't know how to respond, because I didn't understand where you were coming from...

And Karma was not being disrespectful of your religion... he was simply pointing out that it is not correct to say that those who do not follow your religion are not happy, and those that do follow it are happy. And he is correct in saying that. There are hundreds of people of different faiths who are very happy... For you to say that those who do not believe in God are unhappy is incorrect... and that that is disrespect.. you are saying that no one can be happy unless they believe in what you believe... If you want to take that offensively go ahead... but it doesn't change that what you did was disrespectful. You are trying to compare what he said to what you said as just a difference of opinion and that isn't quite right... karma wasn't picking a side... you were.

Needless to say, we have now officially wandered off the original topic... and unless you want to open another thread, I will not continue on in this one.