Hypothetically, if I became a Spinozian and believed that nature was God and God was the universe and all that...but it didn't change my views of the value you of reason, the poverty of faith, morality, etc...Would I still get invited to atheist meetings?
2007-07-30 10:16:41 · 32 answers · asked by Eleventy 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Nah, you're not out of the club.
2007-07-30 10:19:07 · answer #1 · answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7 · 8⤊ 3⤋
Any club that would have me and Einstein together, you're more than welcome to join. I fear I'd be the one knocking on the door asking to be let in.
Atheism is simple the lack of a belief in any god. If you define God in the way that Spinoza and Einstein did, you've defined God so differently than any religions do, you're basically not talking about the same thing.
You're the one who has roped that concept under the umbrella of theism. I don't really think it fits. It may not be "pure" atheism, but then I'm an atheistic student of Buddhism. That framework doesn't always fit within much of atheism, either, but all things being equal, I much prefer to identify with the atheists than the theists...for spiritual reasons.
^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^
2007-07-30 10:24:32 · answer #2 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
All atheists believe that 'matter' is like unto a god. Because they imbue matter with all the attributes and creative powers that are usually attributed to a supernatural God.
The atheists credo. - - -
We believe in one Matter,
The almighty, the omnipotent
Maker of the whole universe
Of all that is seen and unseen
We believe in one Cosmic Egg
The only Son of Matter
Eternally begotten of Matter
Matter from Matter, Energy from Energy,
True Matter from True Matter
Begotten not made,
Of one being with Matter
Through the Egg all things were made
For us men and for our evolution
It formed itself in the heavens
By the power of the Energy it became incarnate into virgin space, and was made Egg
For our sake, it exploded in a singularity,
expanded, and expanded and became everything
In accordance with the ‘Big Bang’ story
It spread across the heavens and evolved into galaxies
It will continue in glory
Until the ultimate heat death
We believe in the Energy, the giver of life, which proceeds from the Matter and the Egg
With the Matter and the Egg it is worshipped and glorified
It has been revealed by the atheists
We believe in one, secular humanist and Darwinian faith
We acknowledge one, atheistic viewpoint for the education of all.
We look for the oblivion of the dead
And the destruction of the world to come.
Amen
2007-07-30 10:22:31 · answer #3 · answered by A.M.D.G 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In other words, using poetic language to describe something that is very clearly not a supernatural god? Probably not, though Richard Dawkins might give you dirty looks because using the word 'god' makes theists think that you believe in an actual god.
2007-07-30 10:20:56 · answer #4 · answered by Minh 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well, personally I have no problem with the Einstein God except this: Using the G word for describing an order in the universe enables fundamentalists to claim you're on their side.
Look at what happened to Einstein.
2007-07-30 10:20:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Einstein didn't assert this view, it has been selectvely decoded using a particular point of view.
He was far too informed to waste time on such infantle concepts as this, and instead looked at the world through the eyes of science.
He did NOT believe in any god or gods..!
Yes you'd still be welcome, but bring some beer..
2007-07-30 10:22:48 · answer #6 · answered by Commonancestor 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You can always get invited to an atheist meeting...(finding one might be tough though,) and the only requirements are to speak honestly on all subjects and to avoid spreading unfounded nonsense.
As far as Einstein goes... you couldn't find a man less interested in the man-invented idea of god. He was an atheist through and through.
http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb62/Randall_Fleck/atheist_imagesGIF.gif
[][][] r u randy? [][][
.
2007-07-30 13:25:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Do labels really matter. I don't think a one word label such as "atheist" can accurately describe someone any more that the word "theist" can accurately describe the thousands of forms of belief in God that there are.
2007-07-30 10:20:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think that it really depends on how you define god at that point. To me the line would be do you think nature is conscious or not. I mean I'm not that far from that idea, but it implies that nature is thinking and I don't think that.
2007-07-30 10:21:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, I think you would still qualify. If you understand Spinoza...him calling nature God, was more like saying nature was "like a god", since what he believed made nature non-sentient and just about how things work and ARE.
atheist
P.S. I find Baruch Spinoza fascinating.
2007-07-30 10:28:10 · answer #10 · answered by AuroraDawn 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
not really. at least in my opinion. the universe is, in effect, god as it it led to the creation of us all. no one can deny that.
but you bring up an interesting point. atheism has became a club. and it's lame. "whooo! we all believe the same thing. now let's get out and convert everyone!"
2007-07-30 10:21:16 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋