Search results

Right

Er no, why?

Indeed, which is why Marx said "I'm not a Marxist". And communism was never actually practiced anywhere, because every communist regime completely twisted the basic philosophy. So there is a semantic problem. People abuse words on purpose for political goals.

Well, I'm one so. Okay, but if you say "I don't think there is anything in the world except matter" then just how many christian sects would not protest? Maybe there are some that wouldn't, but I'm sure the three major ones would.

You are missing the point here. Whether someone is religious or not is not for you to decide because you cannot examine people's convictions. You can very well say "this person doesn't live a religious life". But he can still claim to be religious, and you can't rationally deny that. And, of...

When I say materialist I'm talking about the philosophical meaning. Not the practice of accumulating goods. Another word for that which I think is equivalent is "reductionist". Ie. everything reduces to fundamental particles. Is someone who lives in accordance with Christianity automatically a...

What Ze does is he says "people who behave in ways I don't like are hereby excluded from my religion". Anyone can see that's just an attempt to exclude those "bad people" from bringing criticism onto his religion.

It contradicts the so called supernatural doctrine of various religions. A materialist thinks everything that exists is purely physical matter. So that means humans don't have a "soul", for starters. Now, he can still believe in god this way or that, but it doesn't agree with christian doctrine.

I'm assuming you meant "claim to believe". This is a dishonest statement, and the logical consequence is pointless. You're saying that if someone behaves not according to religious belief that person is automatically an atheist. If that's true then everyone is an atheist because no person has...

It's a confusing place semantically speaking. "Does god exist" is just as much a statement of belief as it is of knowledge. Or can be. It is understood that if you know something to be true you believe it automatically. The reverse is not true, that's where the distinction lies. Another way...

The central question is do you believe in god? Yes -> theist. No -> atheist. Agnosticism is a statement about knowledge. Can you know that there is a god? Yes -> gnostic. No -> agnostic. I think it's clear the first question is the important one here. People make choices based on beliefs, not...

Yes, what an unusual thing in the history of languages.

Are they really? Are you observing a surge of agnostics becoming religious?

Except that despite the dictionary definition agnostic is used to describe people who don't believe in god but refuse to be atheists, because that is the practical use of the word. More importantly, however, what form does this "holding out" take? Do you live your life in accordance with...

lolwut? Where are you getting this?

Do tell.

It is. But the difference between atheist and agnostic is negligible. Neither of them believe in god thus neither of them live in accordance with religious conviction. Atheist<->agnostic is basically a semantic dispute. EDIT: I would even argue that agnostic is the politically correct version...

44% secular? Yah, huge difference.

pedia: Also see here: http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html So whatever the precise number I think it's clear that Israel being in the top 30 or so most atheist societies is still pretty high on the scale.

Actually, they're not. Israel is a very atheistic society. The thing is Jews don't stop being Jews once they stop believing in god, Jewish tradition works just as well on customs and rituals. I heard recently that supposedly 50% of Israelites are atheists. (Of course it may be that the other 50%...