Everyone is convinced

What Religious person is not cock sure of their religion ? All are. If you happen to be a Hindhu or a Buddhest or a Christian or what ever you are, you are sure of the absolute Truth in your religion. How could it be any other way ? Imagine being involved with a religion but you hold out doubt on just how correct the whole thing is. That would be somewhat limp in your belief. When you buy into a doctrine it goes without saying you feel you have joined the ultimate Club. A Club where all other Clubs are lacking in Truth. You have found the Golden Path and that makes you feel secure. Any attempt at critical thinking pertaining to the Clubs dogma will not be allowed, because that might shake the secure nature of the warm and cozy nest you have chosen.

Originally posted by buckky
What Religious person is not cock sure of their religion ? All are. If you happen to be a Hindhu or a Buddhest or a Christian or what ever you are, you are sure of the absolute Truth in your religion. How could it be any other way ? Imagine being involved with a religion but you hold out doubt on just how correct the whole thing is. That would be somewhat lim ...[text shortened]... e allowed, because that might shake the secure nature of the warm and cozy nest you have chosen.

You don't know many Quakers.

Originally posted by buckky
What Religious person is not cock sure of their religion ? All are. If you happen to be a Hindhu or a Buddhest or a Christian or what ever you are, you are sure of the absolute Truth in your religion. How could it be any other way ? Imagine being involved with a religion but you hold out doubt on just how correct the whole thing is. That would be somewhat lim ...[text shortened]... e allowed, because that might shake the secure nature of the warm and cozy nest you have chosen.

Does this mean that no one should be allowed to subscribe to certain parts of their chosen "religion"? For example, because Protestantism is a different form of Christianity that came after Catholicism, does this mean that all Protestants are not religious because they do not believe in, for example, transubstantiation; one of the main parts of the Catholic mass, just because Catholicism was/is the original form of Christianity?

Originally posted by buckky
What Religious person is not cock sure of their religion ? All are. If you happen to be a Hindhu or a Buddhest or a Christian or what ever you are, you are sure of the absolute Truth in your religion. How could it be any other way ? Imagine being involved with a religion but you hold out doubt on just how correct the whole thing is. That would be somewhat lim ...[text shortened]... e allowed, because that might shake the secure nature of the warm and cozy nest you have chosen.

It could easily be lots of other ways. I am not cock sure of what I believe as a Theist and yet within my doubts I find a deeper security. For me faith is a messy , ever changing business and I share your distaste for those who want to make a club out of God.However, you are presenting a stereotype of religion which unfortunately does have some basis in truth but is far from the whole deal. Labelling and generalising will only get you so far. How cock sure are you of what you believe I wonder?

Originally posted by buckky
What Religious person is not cock sure of their religion ? All are. If you happen to be a Hindhu or a Buddhest or a Christian or what ever you are, you are sure of the absolute Truth in your religion. How could it be any other way ? Imagine being involved with a religion but you hold out doubt on just how correct the whole thing is. That would be somewhat lim ...[text shortened]... e allowed, because that might shake the secure nature of the warm and cozy nest you have chosen.

But what's really your point?
I mean, the same could be said about pretty much anything. Humans are all this way - or so it seems to me.
I'm an atheist and I'm pretty 'cock sure' (where does that expression come from?) about my atheism. But so what? You can claim as many do in this forum that there's a degree of rationality to atheism that doesn't exist in religion. And believe me I'd like to think that. But in the end, it probably wouldn't matter to me if someone were to come up with a perfectly rational justification for religious belief.
I'm cock sure.

Originally posted by amannion
But what's really your point?
I mean, the same could be said about pretty much anything. Humans are all this way - or so it seems to me.
I'm an atheist and I'm pretty 'cock sure' (where does that expression come from?) about my atheism. But so what? You can claim as many do in this forum that there's a degree of rationality to atheism that doesn't exist i ...[text shortened]... come up with a perfectly rational justification for religious belief.
I'm cock sure.

My point is this. How can one be "cock sure" of anything pertaining to spiritual matters. The Athiest is just as fanatical as the Born Again nut. Both are convinced they have the Truth. Neither have any idea as to the nature of the " big picture ". It makes one feel secure to think they have discovered the Truth, but in reality it's a mystery.
'

Originally posted by buckky
My point is this. How can one be "cock sure" of anything pertaining to spiritual matters. The Athiest is just as fanatical as the Born Again nut. Both are convinced they have the Truth. Neither have any idea as to the nature of the " big picture ". It makes one feel secure to think they have discovered the Truth, but in reality it's a mystery.
'

Check out my response to Dr. Scrib's "Atheists: Account for existence" thread.

While I cannot be characterized by a belief in even one god, that in no way implies that I am "cock sure" about the "big picture" as you put it.

Originally posted by buckky
My point is this. How can one be "cock sure" of anything pertaining to spiritual matters. The Athiest is just as fanatical as the Born Again nut. Both are convinced they have the Truth. Neither have any idea as to the nature of the " big picture ". It makes one feel secure to think they have discovered the Truth, but in reality it's a mystery.
'

But everyone has to choose a path...even you. To not choose is to choose a path of not choosing.

Originally posted by knightmeister
But everyone has to choose a path...even you. To not choose is to choose a path of not choosing.

It's called agnosticism. It's when you're sure that we can't really gain any viable knowledge in spiritual matters. So, instead of adhering to a specific dogma, you are open to any possibility (god, no god, many gods).

The path you're choosing then, is to not allow religious matters to control your everyday life.

Originally posted by knightmeister
But everyone has to choose a path...even you. To not choose is to choose a path of not choosing.

I have chosen a path. I choose to try to do the right thing in life what ever that might be. I'm sometimes wrong and sometimes right. All you can do is try to not deliberately do wrong. The religious angle on a path for me is full of problems. I can see the narrow limitations on joining up with a specific doctrine. All religions have a lot of good things to offer, and a lot of totally insane things thrown in. The Athiest view is even more incomprenensible to me. The idea that creation is on big fluke and there is no meaning in anything is so far beyond my imagination that it might as well be jibberish. I don't know the specifics of the meaning or origin of why we are here, but I can't help but believe that there is intelligence behind it. Call me wacky but thats the way I feel about the whole thing.

Originally posted by buckky
I have chosen a path. I choose to try to do the right thing in life what ever that might be. I'm sometimes wrong and sometimes right. All you can do is try to not deliberately do wrong. The religious angle on a path for me is full of problems. I can see the narrow limitations on joining up with a specific doctrine. All religions have a lot of good things to o ...[text shortened]... here is intelligence behind it. Call me wacky but thats the way I feel about the whole thing.

Hang on.
You've made a pretty big assumption here about the atheist position.
Atheism is by definition a position that there is no god.
How do you make the jump to then say that atheists believe the universe is one big fluke?

As for meaning?
Why does there need to be meaning in the universe for their to be meaning in your life?
I find the universe completely meaningless in the religious sense. It is a collection of material objects and energy. These things have no meaning.
Does that bother me? No, why should it. You may as well ask am I concerned that there's no meaning in a rock?
I create my own meaning for my life.
I determine that there is a point to my existence and derive my meaning and motivation to continue to do so from that determination. May not be your cup of tea, but there it is.

Originally posted by amannion
Hang on.
You've made a pretty big assumption here about the atheist position.
Atheism is by definition a position that there is no god.
How do you make the jump to then say that atheists believe the universe is one big fluke?

As for meaning?
Why does there need to be meaning in the universe for their to be meaning in your life?
I find the universe ...[text shortened]... ion to continue to do so from that determination. May not be your cup of tea, but there it is.

I would add that the presence of an intelligence behind the universe is not sufficient to ensure that there is meaning to our existence.

Originally posted by telerion
I would add that the presence of an intelligence behind the universe is not sufficient to ensure that there is meaning to our existence.

The whole reason for the existance of man is to turn good food into fecal matter.When left out to spoil, good food turns to fecal matter all by itself.
So basically we have no reason to exist other than the Creator's plan.

Originally posted by buckky
What Religious person is not cock sure of their religion ? All are. If you happen to be a Hindhu or a Buddhest or a Christian or what ever you are, you are sure of the absolute Truth in your religion. How could it be any other way ? Imagine being involved with a religion but you hold out doubt on just how correct the whole thing is. That would be somewhat lim ...[text shortened]... ther Clubs are lacking in Truth. You have found the Golden Path and that makes you feel secure.

What religious person is actually sure of thier religion? How many people actually give up all thier worldly belongings and go out to preach the word of God?

Any attempt at critical thinking pertaining to the Clubs dogma will not be allowed, because that might shake the secure nature of the warm and cozy nest you have chosen.
This statement is true for many religious people and is a clear indication that most people are not as sure as they may pretend. If you are sure that you are right you will not fear criticism. (For another example look at how vehemently many americans defend thier countries 'moral standing'😉

As an athiest and scientist I am more flexible to new ideas. Although I feel comfortable and secure with newtonian mechanics and the idea that time is universal etc, when einstien prooves that wrong and when quantum physics make matter look like probability waves etc my whole life does not collapse around me but instead I try to understand the new reality.

Originally posted by twhitehead
What religious person is actually sure of thier religion? How many people actually give up all thier worldly belongings and go out to preach the word of God?

[b]Any attempt at critical thinking pertaining to the Clubs dogma will not be allowed, because that might shake the secure nature of the warm and cozy nest you have chosen.
This statement is ...[text shortened]... etc my whole life does not collapse around me but instead I try to understand the new reality.[/b]

What religious person is actually sure of thier religion? How many people actually give up all thier worldly belongings and go out to preach the word of God?

David Livingstone and Hudson Taylor to name two. It depends what you mean by "all". Does this include the clothes on their back?