Why Sam Harris and the Left Is Wrong About Religion...

[_ldsfaqs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J3aFIut0Ro

Yep, if Atheism is just "non-belief" then why are there Atheist "Preachers" like Sam Harris?
Belief or Religion is nothing more than embraced ideology, preaching, and conforming behaviors. Atheism has it just like religion which is why we state Atheism is also a "Religion".

The other problem with Atheist judgments of religion is they falsely assume that religious understanding "is not" gained by RATIONAL Thought and Investigation, a.k.a. the Scientific Method. It 100% absolutely IS gained through rational exploration and understanding.

What he mistakes is that man is imperfect and thus can embrace imperfect or false ideas and practices in that pursuit, i.e. the why there are so many different religions all contradictory from each other. That is not to say there are not core true principles that are being embraced, as well that there can't be a "true religion". I know this because I grew up in many different religions and no religion, found one, the only one that made any sense by what the Bible actually said compared to what all the various religions were saying it said, as well I embraced it because it matched other things that should make a true religion, though I didn't know 100% whether it was "true" or not, just that it was the only one that made sense.

I then became Atheist and anti-religion due to a couple of issues I developed with that religion, things I thought were wrong due to my social convention upbringing, as well because I got big into Eastern Philosophy and practices Martial Arts, Meditation etc., . Turns out I was simply ignorant of the issues in question I just accepted them at face value not studying them enough just like Atheists do toward religion. I then compared what their scholars said about various subjects and what the anti's of the religion (or religions) said about the same subjects and I discovered the anti's (atheist or religious) were doing nothing more than lying, using a little truth/facts to lie about the subject or person. I THEN became a 100% and forever a full believer (unless something utterly demonstrates it false, a.k.a. more evidence, though I've thoroughly studied everything by all sides that currently exists, so it would have to be completely new and utterly and clearly daming) despite the imperfections of men, such as kicking my son off his mission due to a blackmailer he interacted with for 1 hour on Facebook, so "he" didn't do anything wrong other than a small mistake in that he wasn't supposed to accept Friend Requests from people he didn't know, or our Bishops not allowing me to live with my family when we weren't married anymore so I could raise my children and heal myself, and we weren't in a relationship. (a relationship is required to be actually against church policy).

Anyway, my point is simply that I came to know the religion I'm in is "True" and I believe in it BECAUSE I studied and experienced it, other religions, and what anti's say about it deeply. Atheist judgments from experience and observation is simply that they are utterly IGNORANT of religion, so they judge it on the surface falsely claiming "superior knowledge" over the religious. The actual truth is it's the religious that have the "superior knowledge" due entirely due to their study and experience of it, not ignorant belief. I'm of course speaking in general, not that there aren't incredibly ignorant religious and religions, there certainly are.

There's a saying in my religion, Faith is the EVIDENCE of things not seen which are True. "Blind Faith" is a false idea held by Atheists toward religion that they think the religious live by and believe and also an idea believed by some religious. However, Faith is NOT "blind". Faith is about seeing what most don't see, the evidence most don't see and THEN believing.

[_Lemmie]

Hey, ldsfaqs, welcome back! I didn't know your son was all grown up, congrats!

such as kicking my son off his mission due to a blackmailer he interacted with for 1 hour on Facebook, so "he" didn't do anything wrong other than a small mistake in that he wasn't supposed to accept Friend Requests from people he didn't know

Ouch. What happened there? He wasn't in Germany by any chance, was he?

[_ldsfaqs]

Hey, ldsfaqs, welcome back! I didn't know your son was all grown up, congrats!

such as kicking my son off his mission due to a blackmailer he interacted with for 1 hour on Facebook, so "he" didn't do anything wrong other than a small mistake in that he wasn't supposed to accept Friend Requests from people he didn't know

Ouch. What happened there? He wasn't in Germany by any chance, was he?

He was in San Jose.... It really disappoints me, apparently, there is a zero-tolerance policy in relation to serious matters being done towards missionaries that could hurt them or others. Apparently, the individual had sent my son lot's of bad images, had told him he was blackmailing him, and that he was going to do things to his other contacts, making threats etc.

Personally, I would have simply asked my son to close the account and moved him to a different mission. The individual in question likely wouldn't have gotten much or done much in that hour since he was engaging my son, so any "damage" to the church or others would have been minimal, and certainly no more than what already could have been done given the time involved, so my son staying on his mission wouldn't even have mattered. It's further sad because someone paid for my son's entire mission also.

[_Gadianton]

religion is they falsely assume that religious understanding "is not" gained by RATIONAL Thought and Investigation, a.k.a. the Scientific Method. It 100% absolutely IS gained through rational exploration and understanding.

There's a saying in my religion, Faith is the EVIDENCE of things not seen which are True.

Since the scientific method is almost entirely devoted to what can be "seen" and measured, it turns out that by your very own words, it has nothing to do with religion after all. You have unwittingly agreed with the atheists; congratulations.

[_Dr. Shades]

Atheism has it just like religion which is why we state Atheism is also a "Religion".

If Atheism is also a religion, then infertility is also parenthood.

[_ldsfaqs]

religion is they falsely assume that religious understanding "is not" gained by RATIONAL Thought and Investigation, a.k.a. the Scientific Method. It 100% absolutely IS gained through rational exploration and understanding.

There's a saying in my religion, Faith is the EVIDENCE of things not seen which are True.

Since the scientific method is almost entirely devoted to what can be "seen" and measured, it turns out that by your very own words, it has nothing to do with religion after all. You have unwittingly agreed with the atheists; congratulations.

Not true at all....

The scientific method is about exploring the pieces of evidence of things that are not known, or things that are known but are not known how and why, they are by the scientific method quantified, measured, validated until THEN are known thus seen and why and how.

Thus, the scientific method is exactly as I've stated. You pervert the method for your agenda.

[_ldsfaqs]

Atheism has it just like religion which is why we state Atheism is also a "Religion".

If Atheism is also a religion, then infertility is also parenthood.

False analogy Shades....

Because Infertility doesn't "act" like it has children, doesn't teach children as if it's their children, doesn't write books on child-rearing, doesn't try to have children follow them, doesn't rail against Parenthood, doesn't tell parenthood that it's intellectually and morally inferior (the last being a joke) and on and on.

Infertility is silent on parenthood, Atheists are not.

Answer the question you guys.... Does Atheism have or have not the 4 pillars of belief?

- Ideology,
- Preachers,
- Followers,
- Conforming Behaviors (i.e. a moral code for Atheists to follow such as the book written by Sam Harris).

It does, thus it's little different than Religion. The only difference is the subject matter.

[_MeDotOrg]

May I just take objection to the title of the OP? 'Sam Harris and the Left' means that every person on the left espouses the same cosmological view as Sam Harris?

[_subgenius]

Since the scientific method is almost entirely devoted to what can be "seen" and measured, it turns out that by your very own words, it has nothing to do with religion after all. You have unwittingly agreed with the atheists; congratulations.

and congratulations to you for unwittingly agreeing with theists.
"Seen" is a bit of an ambiguous term for you to lean on...see also "first vision" (emphasis on vision).
Thousands of millions of people have measured, verified, and reproduced the principles and teachings of religion.
Anomalies is religion, as with anomalies in science can not be reasonably used to dismiss either discipline....or their "method".
...

unwittingly indeed.

[_Res Ipsa]

May I just take objection to the title of the opening post? 'Sam Harris and the Left' means that every person on the left espouses the same cosmological view as Sam Harris?

I’ll give you a standing objection to faqs’ use of “The left” as a monolithic entity.