Ask an atheist anything! (seriously, anything)

  • Thread starter Thread starter SomeGuyWithQuestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I originally started questioning my faith because I fundamentally disagreed with the things that one of my religion teachers was telling the class. I couldn’t comprehend how an all loving, all knowing being would do the things that he was describing. It wasn’t really a choice for me. Was it your choice to stop believing in Santa or the Easter Bunny? I never woke up one day and went, “fine, I’m not going to believe in you anymore!” It was a much more gradual belief change.
But it is a choice. Having faith is a choice. Not having faith is a choice. There is no conclusive evidence one way or the other, so it really comes down to making a choice to believe or not.

So, again, what do you gain by choosing not to believe? And I guess as well, what did you lose by believing?
 
If you are going to equate being ill or having cancer to eternal damnation then one of us is confused about the comparison.
No. I’m not confused at all. An atheist does not believe in life after death. For them here is no eternity to consider. For an atheist, the only equivalence to an eternity of suffering is a lifetime of suffering.

So, if you as an atheist would still have children even if they could be in for a lifetime of suffering, you shouldn’t have a hard time imaging why a Christian would still have children. No one has a child thinking that child will suffer. It’s not complicated.
 
Without the threat of punishment or the promise of Paradise which comes with God, why are we even here? Why do we even exist? Because some molecules smashed together?

This all seems rather bizarre and meaningless if the only reason we are here is to enjoy life and have fun. All the pleasures in the world can’t bring me true happiness.
 
40.png
SomeGuyWithQuestions:
I originally started questioning my faith because I fundamentally disagreed with the things that one of my religion teachers was telling the class. I couldn’t comprehend how an all loving, all knowing being would do the things that he was describing. It wasn’t really a choice for me. Was it your choice to stop believing in Santa or the Easter Bunny? I never woke up one day and went, “fine, I’m not going to believe in you anymore!” It was a much more gradual belief change.
But it is a choice. Having faith is a choice. Not having faith is a choice. There is no conclusive evidence one way or the other, so it really comes down to making a choice to believe or not.

So, again, what do you gain by choosing not to believe? And I guess as well, what did you lose by believing?
I did say most questions had been answered. Including this one. I guess it needs doing so again. But I’ll let Someguy reply.
 
I originally started questioning my faith because I fundamentally disagreed with the things that one of my religion teachers was telling the class. I couldn’t comprehend how an all loving, all knowing being would do the things that he was describing. It wasn’t really a choice for me. Was it your choice to stop believing in Santa or the Easter Bunny? I never woke up one day and went, “fine, I’m not going to believe in you anymore!” It was a much more gradual belief change.
First let me say that I also stopped believing as a teenager. Not aggressive non-belief, more that I didn’t think about the existence of God, and didn’t care. There are plenty of people here who have taken similar paths. I only returned to the Church 30 years later. So I’m not here to give you a hard time, not at all.

Now, regarding the problem of evil, which you refer to, have you done much reading on the issue. Some people say it is the single greatest argument against the existence of God. But would you agree that if God is what classical Catholic theology says he is, that we cannot possibly comprehend the mind of God completely? And if you agree, then would you agree that we cannot possibly say what God would or would not allow, or what good he might not bring out of any evil? Along similar lines, is there any amount of human suffering that could outweigh eternal bliss united with God and all the angels and saints?
 
I did say most questions had been answered. Including this one. I guess it needs doing so again. But I’ll let Someguy reply.
If I missed the answer, please point me to it. I’ve seen lots of discussions about how the decision not to believe was reached, but not why the OP would make that choice.
 
40.png
Wozza:
If you are going to equate being ill or having cancer to eternal damnation then one of us is confused about the comparison.
No. I’m not confused at all. An atheist does not believe in life after death. For them here is no eternity to consider. For an atheist, the only equivalence to an eternity of suffering is a lifetime of suffering.

So, if you as an atheist would still have children even if they could be in for a lifetime of suffering, you shouldn’t have a hard time imaging why a Christian would still have children. No one has a child thinking that child will suffer. It’s not complicated.
But you just suggested that I would have children even though there was a risk. So you imply that we should consider that risk.

My risk is that they might get hurt, die early, become ill. It’s the same for Christians as well. Same worries. We all have them. But you need to consider the danger of them suffering eternal damnation. I’ll repeat that - eternal damnation.

If that’s a risk you are prepared to take then it I’m bemused by it.
 
From whence comes obligation to others or even the idea of such? Not to mention the obvious bait of tacking on Matthew at the end.
 
Last edited:
My risk is that they might get hurt, die early, become ill. It’s the same for Christians as well. Same worries. We all have them. But you need to consider the danger of them suffering eternal damnation. I’ll repeat that - eternal damnation.

If that’s a risk you are prepared to take then it I’m bemused by it.
To be fair, as an atheist, if you’re wrong, you’re basically condemning your children to suffering eternal damnation by teaching them to reject God.

As a Christian, if I’m wrong, my kids are no worse off than they would have been if I didn’t drag them to Mass each Sunday.
 
40.png
MiserereMeiDei:
40.png
Wozza:
Then it means, as I said, that we have an obligation to others. Matthew 7:12.
That’s an absurd thing for an atheist to say.
They just say whatever the electrochemical impulses lead them to say.
It’s funny that I can spend so much time trying to understand the Christian viewpoint. Yet you have no idea how people who are not Christian actually think. And seem not to want to. And dismiss people’s honestly held beliefs so tritely.
 
40.png
HopkinsReb:
40.png
MiserereMeiDei:
40.png
Wozza:
Then it means, as I said, that we have an obligation to others. Matthew 7:12.
That’s an absurd thing for an atheist to say.
They just say whatever the electrochemical impulses lead them to say.
It’s funny that I can spend so much time trying to understand the Christian viewpoint. Yet you have no idea how people who are not Christian actually think. And seem not to want to. And dismiss people’s honestly held beliefs so tritely.
If you say so.
 
If that’s a risk you are prepared to take then it I’m bemused by it.
It’s not really up to me. My vocation is marriage and with it comes the raising of children. Children that I have a responsibilities to instruct in the faith. The rest, I am not in control of.

I suppose it doesn’t make sense to you because you lack faith. But, living a life of faith means I depend on God and trust in his promises. It’s not all up to me. What a relief.
 
Last edited:
From whence comes obligation to others or even the idea of such? Not to mention the obvious bait of tacking on Matthew at the end.
I gave the biblical quote because this is a Christian forum. Seemed appropriate. The reason for the obligation is that it makes the world work. Without it, as it implies in the bible, things go awry.
 
It’s avoidable though ! Eternal damnation is a choice made to reject God and you can’t control that choice made by your children. Very few people would choose it would they.
 
Without the threat of punishment or the promise of Paradise which comes with God, why are we even here? Why do we even exist? Because some molecules smashed together?
This really boils down to one’s sense of aesthetics. To you, clearly, the notion of the universe being capable of producing and sustaining life capable of asking such questions isn’t enough. For others, the idea that we were shaped by natural forces is, if not satisfying on an emotional level, remains so on an intellectual level. For myself (I won’t speak for anyone else), the notion that natural forces and, for lack of a better word, a long series of accidents and steps, makes life very precious indeed. Perhaps it’s only happened once in the last 13.75 billion years.

I fail to see why the value of life is any greater or any lesser because one believes in God or one doesn’t. After all, there have been those who have believed in a Creator who have, on occasion, espoused what I view as a rather nihilistic view of “shoot them all, and let God sort it out.” So you see, even those who believe in God can lean towards a pretty frightening kind of philosophical nihilism.

What I do find is that atheism seems to make some theists uncomfortable. In part, I suspect, it’s because it appears to be such an alien view that they can’t make heads or tails of it. Another explanation is that some people truly believe that the only thing that prevents anarchy is a belief in God. Without it, the view seems to be, we would see ourselves, or at least fellow members of our species, as without value or purpose, and thus abusing or murdering them is of no particular consequence.

I’m a bit of a utilitarian. History is replete with examples of where belief in gods hasn’t restrained violence, and has in some cases been used as a justification. I’m not blaming religion, other than that it becomes another tribal marker; a way to separate “us” from “them”. I also believe religion can be an extraordinary force for good, and in general, particularly with religions like Christianity and some strains of Buddhism, there’s a sort of egalitarianism at the core of the beliefs. But there’s also a danger, in my view, in concentrating far too much on the afterlife, it leads to a sort of “temporal nihilism”, where suffering on Earth is seen as acceptable, if not ultimately beneficial, because, after all, we’ll get our reward in the afterlife.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top