If you intresting in sport Buy trenbolone and Buy testosterone enanthate you find place where you can find information about steroids
  • Resources

  • Book of the Month

  • Shopping on Amazon? Use this search box and support Dangerous Talk at the same time.
  • Blog Directories

    blog search directory Religion Top Blogs
  • AdSense

Could Christianity Be True?

The other day I had a profound thought. I was coming out of the shower and thought to myself, “maybe Christianity is true.” Then I started laughing out loud. My profound thought was that I am moving beyond atheism. It isn’t just that I lack the belief in a god, now I lack the ability to take such a ridiculous concept seriously at all.

To me, Christianity is no more plausible than any other fanciful work of fiction written by people who don’t understand the world. I find myself no longer able to take Christian arguments seriously and the more they try to suck me into their world, the more I find myself taking a step back and laughing.

How can I argue, debate, or discuss anything with someone who believes that an ancient fictional book series is real. It is like arguing with someone who takes the Greek myths to be true. I can no longer see the difference between a Jesus believer and a Hercules believer except that at least the stories of Hercules were far more entertaining.

But there isn’t a word to describe this view. Even anti-theist seems poor and inadequate. Maybe it is time for a new word. How about ridicutheist? Someone who holds that theism is completely ridiculous. I don’t know if I like that term or not. Any suggestions?

Bookmark and Share

Enhanced by Zemanta
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
  • http://www.laughinginpurgatory.com/ Andrew Hall

    I use the term Sky Fairyist to describe theists.

    The term I use to describe myself? Being right.

  • Brian

    Is The Land Before Time a documentary filmed by a time machine? Just like Christianity, it’s possible.

  • Tara

    Moving beyond atheism means that you not only lack a belief in god but that you find the concept ridiculous? That sounds like plain old atheism to me. I think you were/are an agnostic. If you want my definition for what you propose is your new understanding then I would say militant atheist. You would be a 7 on Dawkin’s belief scale.

  • Rachell

    How about fictthiest ….seeing as how all gods are fiction…..or myth-thiest. Because none of it was ever true.

  • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

    Tara, Atheism is defined as the lack of belief in a deity. Agnosticism is defined as the lack of knowledge. I did consider myself an agnostic atheist before and while that definition still fits me, I have moved on to view Christianity as ridiculous. Militant atheist doesn’t fit because I have no weapons and I am not advocating killing or harming anyone (unlike militant religious people).

  • mj

    Yeah, I remember when I realized christianity is equally as ridiculous as other religions.

    If I correctly understand your explanation of “ridicutheist”, I think there is already a word for it.


  • david

    How about a realist. That seems to cover all of the subversive theologies.

  • Tara

    Militant in the context of a belief or cause does not automatically mean you advocate killing or harming anyone. It can mean you are vigorously active and aggressive (thank you Dictionary.com). I get your point, though. I agree both definitions don’t fit.

    The thing that bothers me is how we are breaking down atheism and creating all these “sects.” It’s following the same path of religion. I still don’t understand what an agnostic atheist is. I wonder if we need a name for an atheist who finds religion ridiculous. I’m an atheist and I find religion ridiculous. Does that make me something different from a good old atheist? I’m also a realist and a nihilist. I can also be militant at times. I just don’t get this need to label things. I see it more and more and I don’t understand it. Have you heard about people who consider themselves New Atheists? I had fun trying to figure that one out…

  • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

    I disagree with the dictionary on that definition as it sets up a false equivalency.

    I don’t know of any atheist sects. Atheism isn’t a religion; it’s a label. When I use the phrase “agnostic atheist” I am being descriptive. I am just saying that I lack knowledge and therefore lack belief. Now I am trying to be more descriptive by saying that I lack knowledge, lack belief, and believe belief is ridiculous.

  • Tara

    Staks, I don’t assert that my definition of militant is legit because it’s based on the reputation of dictionary.com. Is that what you’re implying?

    Atheism is the lack of belief and agnosticism is lack of knowledge. Calling yourself an agnostic atheist implies that atheists don’t believe just because they don’t want to. By throwing agnostic in there it means you don’t believe because there’s a lack of knowledge. If you want to play semantics I guess you’re right, but I think it’s silly. The reason atheists lack belief is because they lack knowledge.

  • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

    Tara, dictionaries are resources, not authorities. Most dictionaries have the definition of atheism and agnosticism WRONG!

    “Calling yourself an agnostic atheist implies that atheists don’t believe just because they don’t want to.” Based on what? I don’t really see that at all especially in light of the fact that both you and I agree that, “The reason atheists lack belief is because they lack knowledge,” So I really don’t see what you are arguing, or why you are arguing it.

  • Tara

    Dictionaries are resources and not authorities. Thank you for that clarification. I can see I’m pushing your buttons and I regret that. I think you know I don’t view dictionaries as authorities.

    Let’s say we’re at a party together and someone asks us what our beliefs are. I reply atheist and you reply agnostic atheist. How would you explain the difference? I don’t mean this in a smart ass way. I’ve been trying to figure this out for years.

  • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

    Well for starters, that wouldn’t be my reply. My beliefs are complicated and don’t fit into a singular belief system. I would talk about Humanism, Star Wars, and many other things. If asked if I belief in God, I would say no, I’m an atheist. When prompted about certainty (the dictionary definition – which is wrong), I would clarify by saying I am an agnostic atheist like most atheists are.

  • Tara

    Star Wars? You believe in Star Wars? Can you explain?

  • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

    That might take longer than a comment will allow.

  • Tara

    Wow. OK. That says all I need to know. I wish you the best, my friend.

  • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

    well, you can’t prove Yoda wasn’t 900 years old, lol. You really think that I mean that I literally believe Star Wars is real? Come on, give me a little benefit of the doubt. It is a fictional story that can teach us about real life.

  • Tara

    You throw around the words believe, proof, and evidence far too much for my liking. You’re an interesting cat, I’ll give you that, but I’m not sure we’re playing the same game.

  • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

    I know things like evidence really bother some people, but I would expect it to bother an atheist. Oh well.