Atheists, is there anything religious that sticks with you to this day?

I am Ganesh, an Indian atheist and I don’t eat beef. It’s not like that I have a religious reason to do that, but after all those years seeing cows as peaceful animals and playing and growing up with them in a village, I doubt if I ever will be able to eat beef. I wasn’t raised very religious, I didn’t go to temple everyday and read Gita every evening unlike most muslims who are somewhat serious about their religion, my family has this watered down religion (which has it’s advantages).

But yeah, not eating beef is a moral issue I deal with. I mean, I don’t care that I don’t eat beef, but the fact that I eat pork and chicken but not beef seems to me to be weird. So, is there any religious practice that you guys follow to this day?

edit: I like religious music, religious temples (Churches, Gurudwara’s, Temples & Mosques in Iran), religious paintings and art sometimes. I know for a fact that the only art you could produce is those days was indeed religious and the greatest artists needed to make something religious to be funded, that we will never know what those artists would have produced in the absence of religion, but yeah, religious art is good nonetheless.

yukichigai,
@yukichigai@kbin.social avatar

I still act respectful in churches and other "sacred" places, not out of any fear of the Magic Sky Wizard, but simply because other people respect them and it seems like a useful thing to encourage, even if I don't agree with the underlying reasoning. Having a place which most of society agrees should be a quiet, comforting sanctuary is not the worst thing at all, even if the comfort is derived from extreme wishful thinking.

Also, Christmas. Christmas music is great. A Charlie Brown Christmas is one of the best holiday albums ever, though we always skip "Hark the Herald Angel Sings" 'cause it's such a tonal shift compared to the rest of the album.

CustomDark,

This is really great. I too try to give sacred places as much respect as I can, simply because I know that matters a lot to folks and helps keep the peace. Atheists could gain a lot from the concept of sacred ground and regular communing, even if not from the same obligation.

eestileib,

Yeah except that those places are hives of child abuse, homophobia, and science denial.

I don’t care how quiet and serene they are while plotting their next acts of bigotry.

originalucifer,
@originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com avatar

dont forget the ubiquitous misogyny!

nayminlwin,

The way I talk to monks. In Theravada buddhism, monks are treated as a class above average humans. We had to special wording when speaking with them to be reverent, kind of like when speaking with nobles, royals and whatnot in Europe.

Still awkwardly doing that around most monks when I’m with my family, just out of respect for them. There are a few close monk friends that I can talk to normally though.

gazter,

It’s relatively common for people to just spend a few years as a monk, right?

I reckon itd be weird if one day I’m picking on my little brother, then the next I feel obliged to treat him as royalty, then a couple years later I get to noogie him again.

nayminlwin,

Not years. An average person might spend a few days or weeks as a monk every few years, to sort of cleanse their Karma so to speak.

My brother just decided to be a monk for life though. It’s quite rare that people become monks for life though, especially someone as young as him. A Theravada buddhist monk’s life is more restricted than those of Mahayana traditions like in China, Japan, Korea, etc.

PenPalMoment,

The idea of an after life. I like the idea of seeing pets and people I love again. But do I stricky believe that? No. I look at it as a vague inconsiquential thought that brings comfort. It doesn’t change how I live my life or my atheist beliefs.

rubpoll,
@rubpoll@hexbear.net avatar

After reading Flatland and playing The Forgotten City, I feel like any number of human religions could end up being “true” to some degree. But it would involve aliens, or interdimensional interlopers or something.

rubpoll,
@rubpoll@hexbear.net avatar

I actually just adopted knocking on wood. Couldn’t tell ya why.

Comment105,

“After reading Narnia I feel like any closet could contain a world with magic and monsters and curious creatures.”

You might think yourself an atheist but you’re certainly not a sceptic.

beteljuice,

Anyone who calls themselves “atheist” is certainly not a skeptic. With the insanity presented to us in this boundless reality, how can anyone say for certain what does and does not exist? Agnosticism seems the more skeptical stance.

Comment105,

Reality is absolutely not boundless. Learn a little bit about engineering and you’ll find out how very bounded it is.

And there’s no reason to expect physics to be randomly different in a different distant galaxy.

Is physics wonky at the quantum level? Apparently. Does that mean Vishnu might exist? No.

beteljuice,

Don’t make stupid assumptions about people. I have an advanced degree in physics. “Boundless” was vague and can apply to many things.

Comment105,

Don’t worry mate, there are loads of quacks to keep you company.

beteljuice,

Also dumbfucks if this thread is evidence.

IHaveTwoCows,

How many gods are real? Or is the argument “nuh-UUUUUUHHHH!!! YOU DON’T KNOOOOWW!!!”?

beteljuice,

Your hobby is building straw men.

IHaveTwoCows,

It’s a legitimate question. To say "I don’t know’ is to either accept that at least one of the gods is potentially real and probably more of them. To say ‘you don’t know’ is to be certain that at least one of the gods is real and magic exists.

I find neither position defensible.

kenoh,
@kenoh@lemm.ee avatar

Exmormon here, going on 20 years now. Don’t miss pretty much anything from it except some of the music. Ignore the Republican-looking motherfuckers here and enjoy this: youtu.be/WwYm_mKQ3Gs

charlytune,
@charlytune@mander.xyz avatar

The Osmonds were Mormons weren’t they, which I guess makes this banger a Mormon choon:

youtu.be/iXcj8dFOd1E?feature=shared

kenoh,
@kenoh@lemm.ee avatar

Yep! Imagine Dragons is also kind of Mormon, but has very much butt heads with the church on their LGBTQ stance.

AssPennies,

For me it’s funeral potatoes, or half the desert dishes from various potlucks that would happen in the chapel gym.

Jokes on them though, all those recipes are posted online now! Don’t need a temple recommend for that shit lol.

kenoh,
@kenoh@lemm.ee avatar

Yeah, even though I went on a mission and have tons of family from Utah/AZ/Nevada/Cali, I’m on the East Coast so a lot of LDS culture like that didn’t sink in. I would honestly probably participate in ex-mo stuff more if I had to deal with it on a daily basis, but I’m fine mostly pretending it doesn’t exist!

Setarkus,

For a moment I was worried that “funeral potatoes” was some euphemism for something there that I couldn’t identify

ivanafterall,
@ivanafterall@kbin.social avatar

You may be thinking of soaking.

meyotch,

Only true friends will jump-hump for you.

Setarkus,

What’s that?

ivanafterall,
@ivanafterall@kbin.social avatar
Setarkus,

Just seeing urban dictionary in the link makes me worry

Edit: Welp, I actually recognize this. And now this will stay in my mind in a funeral-potatoes-context

meyotch,

Oh, hie, Kolob!

kenoh,
@kenoh@lemm.ee avatar

KLOLob!

ThatHermanoGuy,

Not really. I try very hard not to let myself fall prey to so-called “cultural religion.” I don’t celebrate any religious holidays like Christmas. I try to be as aware as possible of the religious influences in my daily life and avoid them. It’s not easy, though! Religion has infested so many facets of every culture, it becomes increasingly difficult to separate.

blackbrook,

Western culture is (as is every other culture) indeed infused with religion. There are lots of good things that come from it. Are we to throw them away because they are “tainted” by some religious element in their origin or development?

We’ve ended up in a very culturally poor place because in moving away from religion we throw so much out. Babies with bath water, as it were.

We’ve moved to a rationalist mentality without a good understanding of how man is an inherently cultural animal. And culture until recently was very hard to separate from religious aspects.

Note that I am an atheist myself, not brought up religious, and I don’t have answers to how to resolve this awkward place we have gotten to. But I’m quite sure that avoiding cultural elements simply because there is a religious taint is not helpful. Are we to throw away all of Bach’s music?

ThatHermanoGuy,

I would never suggest doing away with Bach’s or any other sacred music or art. They can and should be appreciated in their proper historical context.

I don’t think it’s at all fair to say we have ended up in a “culturally poor” place. People are still producing all kinds of cultural contributions without religion. If anything, it is capitalism that has commodified culture causing some of the decline we see today.

blackbrook,

I agree that capitalism is a big part of the decline. And I am not saying we need to embrace religion to embrace culture, or that lack of religion is the cause of a decline in culture. I am saying that all our cultural heritage, tends to have influences from religion, and that this is not a reason to reject it. You don’t have to take the religious elements, just don’t throw out the whole thing because a cultural aspect of a practice or an artifact has elements in its history you find unsavory.

Enjoy the music of Bach and you don’t even need to care about the “proper historical context.” Enjoy Christmas and ignore the Christian elements, if you like, or view then as a quaint part of its rich history (as Christians did the pagan elements). All cultural threads have always changed throughout history as people have adapted them to their current worldviews and needs. Hand-wringing about historical accuracy and taints from aspects of history we don’t like is a modern disease.

As to being in a culturally poor place, the difficulty with that discussion is that the word “culture” covers a lot of ground. We are rich with certain types of culture (yes all the kinds that can be sold to us). We are poor in other kinds, particularly kinds that build community. Capitalism favors the short term, the trend of the day, and that which divides us into manipulatable markets.

NuPNuA,

I was raised entirely non-religiously, but I still still celebrate “cultural Christmas” since that’s what we do in the UK. I don’t go to midnight mass or watch Songs of Praise, but putting up the tree and having a big roast dinner is good times.

Nevoic,

Yeah choosing to abstain from eating certain animals for moral reasons (dogs/cats/cows/horses) and not others (pigs/chickens/fish) is definitely weird. Though the majority of people in western society fall into this category, you just moved one more animal across the boundary due to normalization. If you were brought up with pigs, chickens, and fish you’d probably abstain from those too.

The real question to ask though is despite normalization, what’s actually the right thing to do? Is it actually okay that some people eat dogs, cats, and cows? Or is it wrong to do this?

People should put more effort into reconciling this dissonance, because slaughter and oppression is not a matter we should leave up to the normalization of society to decide. Society has countless times normalized immoral things.

beteljuice,

This absolutely. Rather than think it strange that you don’t eat cows, you should think it strange that you eat any sentient being at all. If something feels pain and runs away, it’s a strong sign that we should not use and abuse them, especially when our needs can be met without doing so.

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

I still cross my fingers for luck.

Subject6051,

I didn’t know that was religious?

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

Supposedly, it invokes the Christian symbol of the cross.

pomodoro_longbreak,
@pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works avatar

Oh fascinating. Never thought twice about it.

TheGreenGolem,

I never thought even once about it!

Subject6051,

*Jesus does not approve of this

abrasiveteapot,

Although wikipedia has that as the origin several other internet sources suggested a pagan pre christian origin

…com.au/…/fascinating-origins-of-everyday-hand-ge…

mentalfloss.com/…/why-do-we-cross-our-fingers-goo…

www.bbc.co.uk/ideas/videos/…/p06j436j

Noting that these are not proper sources although mental floss links to a text that may be reliable

all-knight-party,
all-knight-party avatar

I'd say I'm agnostic, but my parents also didn't force religion on me, my dad is Catholic, and my mom is Thai Buddhist, and I view the Buddhist ideology to strive for being satisfied without material as an honorable goal. I feel as if I believe that attaining that mindset really is nirvana, and I don't think you need to be particularly religious to think that's possible.

Subject6051,

do atheists give you slack for being agnostic? I have seen many memes on the internet bashing agnostics (quite funny tbh), so asking

The Imperial Japanese ruined Buddhism for me.

all-knight-party,
all-knight-party avatar

To be honest, after high school it just either doesn't seem like most people I know my age are very religious at all either way, or otherwise it doesn't come up.

I haven't had anyone give me shit for it, personally, I don't take offense to online meme bashing, everybody gets it

PeachMan,
@PeachMan@lemmy.one avatar

One of the perks of being agnostic is that you don’t have to tell people you’re agnostic. When others ask me about my religion, I just shrug and say I was raised Christian but I’m not really religious anymore. I don’t mention that I’m agnostic unless they pry and ask more questions.

shadysus,

atheists give you slack for being agnostic

I find that to be really odd behavior tbh. One of the issues with organized religion is when a group shuns or hates on someone for their religious/ spiritual views. That’s also something that can happen with atheism, even if it’s not really seen as a “religion”.

Just be accepting of other people

TheWoozy,

Off topic: I’m old & out of the loop. Is this a new meaning for “give slack”? It seems opposite of what my understanding. To me it means giving leeway, or latitude, or freedom. To give someone slack was to give some freedom or forgiveness. A metaphor of lengthening a dog’s leash.

Feddyteddy,

You’re not alone, that’s what giving or cutting someone some slack means to me as well. I hadn’t considered that maybe this was a sign of me aging.

shadysus,

I’m not sure if slack has a new meaning, but it might be one of those misspellings where the person really means “flack”

“To give flack” fits the context here

MeanEYE,
@MeanEYE@lemmy.world avatar

That’s because you didn’t tried good quality dry aged steak.

WindowsEnjoyer,

Dried beef is gooooood ♥️♥️♥️🥩🐄🐮🤠

Zacryon,

No.

WindowsEnjoyer,

I love this answer.

Atheism is not a religion. We don’t fight or argue with religious people since we don’t care. We don’t bring up atheism with other people as a topic to discuss since we simply don’t care.

I am not sure if this is the right comparison, but we don’t really care if the earthworm feels that it wants to take a shit. Or what it feels for a worm when taking a shit. I simply don’t care. Same about the religions.

aaaaaaadjsf,
@aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net avatar

As an atheist that was raised as an evangelical Christian, probably using the Lord’s name in vain interestingly enough. Like going “thank God/Jesus” when something good happens, “oh God/lord” when shit hits the fan, and using Christ’s name as a swear word. I know it’s supposed to a sin in the Christian religion, but it’s the one thing I still do.

Outdoor_Catgirl,
@Outdoor_Catgirl@hexbear.net avatar

Same.

init, (edited )

Not to be that guy, but “using the Lord’s name in vain” has been misinterpreted and misapplied by Christianity as a whole for a very, very long time. “Using the Lord name in vain” is not saying “goddamit”, or “Jesus Christ, thats Jason Bourne”, but instead by saying you are Christian, or a follower of Christ’s teachings, and being indistinguishable from non-christians in the way one acts, speaks, thinks, dresses, etc,.

Does this mean that cursing as described above is bad? Maybe, and maybe not–it depends on your convictions.

One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. -Romans 14:5-6

Back when the Torah and minor prophets were written, taking someone’s name was to become their relative or kin. Even by the time Jesus came into the picture, it was still a common thing to take the name of a family to were adopted into, or to a land you moved to. Therefore, taking the Lord’s name in vain" should be more accurately described as calling oneself a Christian, and then not living as one. This is endemic in Christianity–our divorce rates are practically indistinguishable for secular society, premarital sex, cheating–not to mention, we have a huge problem with covering up pedophiles, spousal abuse, child abuse, the list goes on. I believe God knows this, and Jesus even spoke to it when he was on earth.

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. -Matthew 7:21

So, basically, I think God cares about the important stuff, like not acting like a hypocrite while labeling oneself one of his believers–not the inane stuff like saying “goddamnit”. But, if someone believes firmly that saying swearwords containing God’s name in it is also a sin, then by all means, that is treated and will be judged as a sin for that person.

And if we want to get technical, Lord, Jesus Christ, and God are not his names. Even names the Christian god is known by, such as El, El Shaddai, Yeshua, Messiah, Jah, Jahova, and possibly Yahweh (YHWH, but we don’t know for sure because Jewish scholars never recorded his name to prevent anyone from uttering it) are actually descriptors of who he is. El “The Lord”, El Shaddai “The Lord will cover”, Yeshua (actual name of Jesus, but not the name of God), Jah (first letter of the tetragrammaton “YHWH” ), Jahovah “The Lord will provide”. Technically, it is impossible to use the Lord’s name in vain if using his name in vain is defined as simply using it as a swear word or part of a curse because his name has been lost to history.

Sorry, that’s way more information than I intended.

EDIT: And I also want to make sure I make it abundantly clear that this is simply my interpretation of things, based upon my own experience growing up in a Baptist church, and seeing all the hypocrisy there and in my own parents lives (where both were abusive in their own ways). I’m not really what anyone would call a practicing Christian because I don’t attend church, tithe, or vote “prolife”. Organized religion in its current form, is in my opinion, a perversion of what God intended. But this is just my opinion.

ThisIsAManWhoKnowsHowToGling,

You just voiced all of my frustrations with so many Christians. I’m going to save this.

twice_twotimes,

This is a really cool take. I’ve never heard that interpretation of “taking the lord’s name” but I like it a lot. Do you know anywhere I can read more about that idea or the history of the phrase?

init,

The first time “taking the Lord’s name in vain” was written in the bible is Exodus 20:7, and is echoed again in Deuteronomy 5:11.

“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.”

The original Hebrew text and word used for the word “vain” in Exodus 20:7 is “Shav” according to Strong’s Concordance. This word specifically means:

shav; from the same as (related word) in the sense of desolating; evil (as destructive), lit. (ruin) or more. (espec. guile), fig. idolatry (as false, subj.) uselessness (as deceptive, obj.; also adv. in vain):–false (-ly), lie, lying, vain, vanity.

Strong’s Concordance - ISBN 0-7852-1195-0

As defined above, “using the Lords Name in vain” has more to do with lying, guile, idolatry (believing in a god other than than the “one true god”, which could be believing in a version of God inaccurate of who He is because you like your own version better), uselessness, and being false. I would very much define saying one identifying as Christian, yet not living and acting like one as the ultimate exercise in uselessness and hypocrisy.

The Strong’s Concordance has every word in the King James Version exhaustively identified with definitions of each. It is how theologians that aren’t actually fluent in Greek or Hebrew can break apart a verse to find the true meaning that has been lost to dialect, translation, and the time. If you’re interested, I would highly recommend finding one, or even downloading it.`

Here is a blog post that hits most of what I mentioned, and also has a few more things to consider.

One interesting thing of note is that, according to Leviticus 19:12, Christians are commanded to not bring shame upon their God by using him to swear falsely.

“Do not bring shame on the name of your God by using it to swear falsely. I am the LORD." -Leviticus 19:12

This implies that there are ways and times where it may actually be appropriate to use the Lord’s name, or your association to him as a Christian, to swear if something is true. However, Jesus recommends or commands in the New Testament that no one swear by anything, either by God or anything else, and to let only your “yes be yes, and your no be no” lest one brings judgement upon themselves.

"But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one” -Matthew 5:37

And here is one more final thing to think about. In Christianity, God is perfect and without sin. If he were to sin in any way, by definition he would fall under the law of death, as death is the punishment for sin. Jesus, as an aspect of God, was also blameless and without sin. Many also believe the Bible to be the literal or interpreted word of God, such that any changes throughout time were foreseen and anticipated. I have my own views on this, but for the sake of my argument, we must assume the entire scripture to be God-breathed. If God cannot sin, and the bible must therefore be truthful, then how did God swear by using his own name, if swearing by his own name is sinful?

"For when God made a promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself” -Hebrews 6:13

Therefore, either God sinned by using his own name in vain and cannot be god, God sinned by lying about it in the literal word of God in Scripture, or swearing by using the name of God or its derivatives is not inherently sinful, and the intent or veracity is what is judged.

The_Jewish_Cuban,
@The_Jewish_Cuban@hexbear.net avatar

For me it’s my like for religious Christmas music.

bunkyprewster,

I went to Catholic catechism as a child and one of the few things I remember was Jesus washing other people’s feet. I like the humility of that and it inspires me to want to do acts of service

the_itsb,
@the_itsb@hexbear.net avatar

Me too, this is one of the main things that stuck with me. Honestly, idk how to think of myself except in relation to my service to community, it has really shaped my entire experience of the world.

sloppy_diffuser,

Similar upbringing in Catholic school. Acts of humility like a poor person giving what little they have holds more weight than a king giving their weight in gold, the golden rule, and showing general compassion has stuck with me decades later. Education was pretty good too. None of that dinosaurs lived 6000 years ago or whatever crap. I attribute the education to giving me the critical thinking skills to not fall for the indoctrination. I could tell the poor giving message was a lead in for tithing. Taking a message of helping someone in real need no matter your status to support this church that was the best looking building in town didn’t pass the logic test.

Blake,

Was chatting with a young (17-ish) atheist guy recently who misremembered this as “isn’t there a bit in the bible where Christian licks a prostitute’s feet?” which truly left me with so many things I wanted to say that I could bareky say anything without laughing so much, but I managed to get out “did you think Jesus was called Christian??”

somethingsnappy,

I was raised without religion, but read religious texts. I have always wanted to touch my closest peoples feet or wash them. It seems so humble and real.

The_Jewish_Cuban,
@The_Jewish_Cuban@hexbear.net avatar

We washed a person’s feet before doing a special religious service project. Essentially like you said, to humble the self and focus on the act and God. Of course the project was really bad in terms of morality but I do think ritual aspects of religion feel nice. As someone said, people are cultural and engaging in acts and symbolism feels good.

Kahlenar,

Catholic guilt. My parents were atheists when they had me, but still instilled guilt in me so hard it hurts to this day.

Comment105,

How? Did they send you to Catholic school and/or convert to Catholicism after they had you?

JGrffn,

I still use common colloquialisms without paying much mind to them. “thank God, oh my god, Jesus christ” etc. Kinda hard to get rid of those, but it’s no biggie, really.

What I will say, is that while I do identify as an atheist in the sense of not believing in established religions or cults, I do consider that I am able to believe in more than what reality presents. I’ve always said I’m an agnostic atheist, but as of late, I’ve been feeling like it’s rather OK and even necessary to wonder about reality and existence a lot more than what science allows itself to. For example, if you take even a moment to ponder about what physics and the quantum realm means about reality, you’ll feel like something else is definitely going on, like we’re obviously not seeing the full picture and there’s a good chance we never will, and that the picture were missing is unparalleled in its majesty. To just think that we seem to be just a combination of countless fields fluctuating together to form reality, but at the end of the day you could just say we’re the expression of different waves going through different mediums juxtaposed on each other. A combination of planes crashing in on each other in a multidimensional membrane, a universe that could be just one possibility out of a mostly dead multiverse, where even our universe seems to be mostly dead, yet here we stand. It’s hard to wrap your mind around it, or even begin to grasp it all. Definitely makes you feel like there’s more to it than just chance, hell, chance sounds like an implausible explanation for all of this.

I think I mostly take issue with “matter of fact” stances, where people will claim things are a specific way because their faith or textbook says so. No. Just, experience life, question it, question your beliefs, but also question life itself, don’t settle for just “big bang and chance and meaninglessness” as science is just a tool, don’t settle for just “God willed it all and demands these things of us”, we’re not here for that long, let’s ponder on it all while we can, and enjoy the life that were lucky (or unlucky) to be able to experience for one moment in eternity of nothingness, or an eternity of eternities of different existences. Who knows what were doing here, where we go from here, where do we come from? It’s ok to acknowledge that the answer to those questions is “nobody on this earth knows, and maybe we’ll never know”. Let’s cope together, let’s smile together, let’s live and ponder together.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • [email protected]
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • oklahoma
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines