The JREF is not an atheist organization

Apology said:
Take your time, I can wait. :) I'd rather have you put your best thinking into the question than rush you. JREF will still be here tomorrow, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Well, if the corn dogs get it first....

Anyhoo, as I was saying, if you've been pegged for calling yourself an atheist and the person disagrees with your particular take on it, that tells me that I'm on the right path. We need a better lexicon for this kind of thing. We've allowed this Aristotelian thinking to dominate the words for too long. We need to develop a word to describe the breadth of meaning that "atheist" just doesn't convey.

Oh, btw, my "security blanket" comment was not a denigration of Deists. It's more of a slightly humorous take on Martin Gardner's answer to the question of why he believes in god; "It's comfortable". I just get the mental image of Linus and his blanket whenever I hear that. Besides, there are far worse things to use as a security blanket. Some drink, some eat, some believe in god.
 
CFLarsen said:
No, they are not.

Hal is a deist. What does he claim evidence of?
Click to expand...

A god, Claus. A god. Deists believe in the existence of a god. Hal, by claiming to be a Deist is de facto claiming that there is a god. What do you not understand about this concept?

Here, listen to it your own self.


Can someone please tell me why I'm arguing this?

Even better, someone hand me my dried frog pills.
 
Last edited:
CFLarsen said:
Does Hal claim evidence of his god, yes or no?
Click to expand...

Interesting, in the past you've refused to take my word as evidence. Go. Listen. Find out for yourself. I've just handed you a primary source on a platter and you refuse to take it. Interesting.
 
kmortis said:
Interesting, in the past you've refused to take my word as evidence. Go. Listen. Find out for yourself. I've just handed you a primary source on a platter and you refuse to take it. Interesting.
Click to expand...

I'm not taking your word as evidence.

If you say that he does claim evidence of his god in the podcast, I will check.

If he doesn't, why link to it?

So, does he? Does Hal claim evidence of his god in the podcast, yes or no?
 
I am placing this thread on moderated status. Please keep posts specifically on topic to the JREF itself.

Definitions of atheist, deist, etc should be discussed in the Religion and Philosophy subforum.

Claus and kmortis - I suggest you take this slight derail to PMs. If evidence is presented in threads, either review it and comment, or ignore it and don't comment. Don't bicker over whether it should be reviewed or not. Further posts about whether or not a link should be clicked or not will not be approved.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
martillo said:
I don't know who comprises "The JREF". That's why I asked.

With all those posts I thought you would have an answer. Sorry.
Click to expand...


Martillo- Point of information.

The JREF at one level consists of a handful of people in Florida.That's JREF staff. I believe all those individuals are atheist (IIRC).
Next level out would be paid up subscription members. Only one I know off the top of my head is me. And I'm an atheist.

Then there's the JREF Forum, which is another thing entirely.
Whether atheism is a majority view on the forum is a hard one to answer, but the percentage of atheists is certainly high- especially for a US-based organisation.
 
Soapy Sam said:
Martillo- Point of information.

The JREF at one level consists of a handful of people in Florida.That's JREF staff. I believe all those individuals are atheist (IIRC).
Next level out would be paid up subscription members. Only one I know off the top of my head is me. And I'm an atheist.

Then there's the JREF Forum, which is another thing entirely.
Whether atheism is a majority view on the forum is a hard one to answer, but the percentage of atheists is certainly high- especially for a US-based organisation.
Click to expand...

I am JREF Staff. I am not an atheist.
 
I've never understood the exception of religion in JREF's quest to educate people in skepticism... Everybody is skeptical about something, why not just pick something else beside religion... like we are a group who are skeptical about everything, but if you believe in ghosts you're still welcome.
I've always thought of JREF as an educational experience, and it has always bothered me that officially it stops short of being skeptical about mainstream religions.
 
You'd have a point if it wasn't!

Surely you have read SWIFTs in which Randi deals with the claims of religious (mainstream and other) folk?
 
Godmode said:
I've never understood the exception of religion in JREF's quest to educate people in skepticism... Everybody is skeptical about something, why not just pick something else beside religion... like we are a group who are skeptical about everything, but if you believe in ghosts you're still welcome.
I've always thought of JREF as an educational experience, and it has always bothered me that officially it stops short of being skeptical about mainstream religions.
Click to expand...

Please reread the OP and the posts on the first page to understand the actual issue raised by this thread. Like far too many people who have posted here, you're misunderstanding it's intent.
 
I was once invited to join a forum that supposedly was open to any form of stance either pro or contra religion (christian religion predominantly). When I got to the site the first thing in the welcoming of new users it stated: "Discussions on the obviously flawed theory of evolution will be locked and removed."

This to me sent warning flags that that forum was anything but open-minded on whatever topics, so I decided not to join.

Equally, if any website, forum, or blog would have a similar stance on religion (i.e. "If you believe in any deity you will not be given any quarter since it is utter nonsense") I would not sign up there either.

I never got that impression with the JREF. I do realize that should a person that does believe in religion make any bold claims in name of their faith they should be able to back these claims up with hard evidence. After all, that is what is required for any claim on any skeptic site. That imho does not make the JREF an atheist organization, and anyone with any belief system should not feel unwelcome here.
 
I have always been a skeptic, but not always an atheist. The former eventually brought on the latter. Had I known about the JREF before, I would have joined before, and I probably would have felt as at home then as I feel now. As a NooB, I have observed that most posters here can discuss the subject at hand without bringing religion into it. unless, of course, the subject is religion. Religious debate seems to be only a fraction of the overall discussion in the forums. Just my take.
 
Hello everyone I'm brand new here but this thread immediately caught my eye...

it caught my eye because I am currently a member of richarddawkins.net and have been contributing for about a month... the vast majority of atheists that I have so far encountered on that website or of the "simply recognition of the lack of evidence for a God's existence" type, which is good because it kind of gets me angry when people blindly assert that there is with 110% certainty that there isn't a god. I found my way to JREF because of RD's forum, and at least as I see it skepticism seems like a de-facto atheism, but perhaps "agnostic" is a better term.
 
Taking this off moderated status. It will be returned if the thread has problems again
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
c_mullark said:
the vast majority of atheists that I have so far encountered on that website or of the "simply recognition of the lack of evidence for a God's existence" type, which is good because it kind of gets me angry when people blindly assert that there is with 110% certainty that there isn't a god.
Click to expand...

I am one of those 99% sure atheists, because 100% certainty does not exist. The probability of any deity in my humble opinion is very low. So in theory I should be agnostic, but in practice I consider myself an atheist. One that 1 to 7 scale a 6.

But who knows, someone might present overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I am sure that evidence will not include scripture though.
 
I am one of those 99% sure atheists, because 100% certainty does not exist. The probability of any deity in my humble opinion is very low. So in theory I should be agnostic, but in practice I consider myself an atheist. One that 1 to 7 scale a 6.

But who knows, someone might present overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I am sure that evidence will not include scripture though.
Click to expand...

I 99% percent agree with you.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom