Emotions, God, and Atheism

  • Thread starter Thread starter utunumsint
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Frank,

If what you mean by humility is that atheists prefer not to pretend to know things that they don’t know and have evidence in support of their beliefs, then I agree.

I am always struck by believers claiming that atheists are arrogant and that humility is a Christian virtue while simultaneously claiming to know things about science and history that no scientist or historian could claim and claiming that the creator of the universe takes a personal interest in them. To me that sounds like narcicism rather than humility.

Best,
Leela
Hi Leela,
I was just trying to understand the mind of atheist/agnostic better. 😊

It is impossible for someone to know something they don’t know.🤷

Pride can be the one thing that keeps people from breaking through the wall of understanding for the believer and the non-believer alike. :banghead: :hammering:

Pride gets people caught in a loop of reason that doesn’t end. :hypno:

It takes a leap of faith to break free.
 
I’ve got to say that was sort of nasty - unworthy of you. You do not know whether I passed through atheism or not on my journey, yet accuse me of not wanting to seek truth. I have yet to throw accusations at atheists, I would think you would provide the same consideration. I do feel comfortable because I have examined the possibilities open to me and decided on truth. I don’t force my ideas upon you, you asked and I answered. It is okay if you don’t accept what I say, but please don’t insult me when I answered directly and honestly what you asked.
Sigh, when I say you , I don’t mean a specific you, it’s a conceptual one. I should start saying “When one, does this, or when one believes that, it is possible, yadda yadda yadda”.

I was just being lazy in my wordy. Sorry to offend.
 
Hi Leela,
I was just trying to understand the mind of atheist/agnostic better. 😊

It is impossible for someone to know something they don’t know.🤷

Pride can be the one thing that keeps people from breaking through the wall of understanding for the believer and the non-believer alike. :banghead: :hammering:

Pride gets people caught in a loop of reason that doesn’t end. :hypno:

It takes a leap of faith to break free.
Unless you’ve ever been an athiest/skeptic then you probably won’t ever understand the mindset. I do not say that to be mean, It would be like me(as a female) claiming I can understand the mind of a male. I can intellectualize it, but I can never really know it.

I also think there are a lot of people who have made statements that they were “athiests” before, and are now believers, I don’t actually think they were. Or at least, It think there are two distinct groups of non-believers, and it can be difficult to tell the difference between them.

You may have a point here about pride to a degree(we often pride ourselves on our ability to give up a “belief” in a God, for the sake of truth, no matter how painful that may be), but I don’t think that skeptics are quite as “pride” filled as people seem to think.

I do, however think we can get stuck (though I’m not going to get into that unless you want me to) and can be a little less kind to those that are religious than perhaps we should be.

For me, it is simply that I cannot sit there and claim another persons truth as my own. If some-one claims a religious experience, it may have been real for them but was it actually real? There are lots of other alternative explanations and way too many assumptions made when it comes to religion, imo.

The world doesn’t have to make sense right now, and I certainly won’t put a great deal of stock in what humans believed thousands of years ago, when they were quite a bit more ignorant than we are about the natural world. I accept they were not stupid, some were brilliant but their ideas were always based on ignorance.(as are our ideas today…we don’t have it all figured out yet either).
 
Belief in God makes that belief true for that person. Not neccessarily absolute truth because absolute truth will only become real when the truth manifest itself to be real. By the time absolute truth becomes real it will be too late for non-believers because their time on earth will be done. So why not just believe “as if” there is a God, and call it truth? You don’t have to call it absolute truth. No believer really does have absolute truth. Absolute truth reveals it self after you die. Believe “as if” there is a God, and let that be true for you. Have faith in your truth of the belief otherwise you are lieing to yourself. I’m sorry if you think that you are not capable of doing this…but you are capable, just not willing.

Science doesn’t ever prove anything, but it calls what seems proven to be true. It doesn’t say it is absolute truth because someone can always come along and prove it wrong, but until then it calls it true and believes it to be true (but not absolute truth).

Prove God does not exist and then you are justified in your non-belief. Otherwise, why not create that truth in your life for the sake of your eternal soul.

I love you Big Daddy. 😉
Because a skeptic individual cannot believe something that may not be true. That IS the nature of the skeptic. That is who they are.

This is where we really, really are at odds with one another. You are saying believe in something that may not be true, just in case it gives you a reward of an eternal life.

This, to me…is the height of dishonesty. Do you really think one can “fool” God in this way, if God does actually exist? Do you really think God would be particularly impressed by those that lie to him for the sake of a heavenly reward or pretend they believe rather than search for truth so they have an outclause?

I cannot say this enough, once a skeptic “submits” to truth, they will struggle to do anything other than this. You cannot believe what is not true.(regardless of what may be absolutely true).

Does that mean the Skeptic NEVER lies to oneself? Of course not…but most will eventually face their lies, and move on.(though we can become stuck also)

If you can’t understand how that feels, then go with the tried and true analogy of Santa. Could you ever really believe in Santa again? I’m not saying God = Santa, I’m asking you if you can think of anything in your life, where it simply is not possible for you to believe(Santa is just a fairly good analogy) because as soon as you try and believe you know by default you are actually lying to yourself.

That, is how an athiest feels.

Pascals wager, is such a dreadful dishonest concept. Even pascal admited as much.
 
Dameedna,

Thank you for you honesty. I am trying to understand putting truth above all other things. I can’t wrap my mind around it. I keep hitting my reasoning wall that goes something like this: belief=truth=faith=Absolute Truth=proof. It seems like maybe your reasoning wall goes something like: proof=belief=Absolute Truth=faith. Correct me if I’m wrong.

I’m not sure what your thoughts/feelings are about Jesus. He said he was the truth, and I really believe him. He is the only truth I need for God to exist. I feel so much love for God and can feel Gods love for us. I just can’t believe that this feeling is some made up human emotion.

Your buddy,
Frank
 
belief + faith = truth

truth + hope = Absolute Truth

Absolute Truth + love = God

:christmastree1: + :snowing: = :winter:
 
Dameedna,

Thank you for you honesty. I am trying to understand putting truth above all other things. I can’t wrap my mind around it. I keep hitting my reasoning wall that goes something like this: belief=truth=faith=Absolute Truth=proof. It seems like maybe your reasoning wall goes something like: proof=belief=Absolute Truth=faith. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Putting truth above all else, simply means submitting to something higher than yourself. Truth, is an Ideal…bigger, and more important than the individual.

You said, Belief=truth=faith=absolute Truth=Proof.

Belief does not equal truth.

To me, Proof=Truth. Until I have proof about something, I cannot claim it as truth.I do extend that obviously to methods that seek proof that is verifiable, such as Science. I personally have not performed the myriad of experiments that exist. And, because I do not perform these experiments myself, although I trust the method, I AM skeptical of so called Scientific Proofs(especially those provided by the media), so in a nutshell, I think Proof=as much truth as we can attain via the scientific method and apply to all humanity. But I doubt we will ever figure it all out. I think that is beyond us.

Do I have “faith” in the scientific method? I’m not sure you could say I do, because the method has shown itself to work. So I trust it, based on what it’s achieved.

The question for you here is, can you live with the unknown? Can you accept there may be things we can never figure out, no matter how much we want to believe?
I’m not sure what your thoughts/feelings are about Jesus. He said he was the truth, and I really believe him.
No, a book claims that Jesus said that. I ask this in all sincerity, do you believe everything you read? If not, why believe this? Why do you not believe the Quran?Why do you believe the authors of the bible were telling the truth? Why do you believe that they were representing Jesus and the events around is life accurately? They were human after all.

C.S Lewis puts forth a rather compelling argument as to why Jesus was actually God. Jesus said he was. Either he was stark raving Mad, or he was in Fact God. Since he didn’t come across at all, as stark raving mad then could it be possible he WAS God.? That he was telling the truth?

There is another possibility here Frank, and that is…He never said it in the first place. The words were put into his mouth, by well meaning humans who were obviously greatly impacted by his life and wanted people to LISTEN to what he was saying.

What is Actually known about what Jesus said, is very little. I don’t think the bible has changed that dramatically since it was written, contrary to what some skeptics believe, but The Gospels were written by people trying to portray a meaning.

How far did they go, and what did they attribute to Jesus, to try and put across that message? That is the job of the historian and biblical scholars. Jesus obviously impacted them greatly but DID he claim he was the truth and DID he claim he was God, or was this how the Gospel writers attempted to portray him because this is how THEY felt about him? Edited: Cut out some stuff that was supurflous.

I would suggest reading books by theologians that have chosen to leave the church, rather than support what they now realize to be inaccurate teachings. Most however do not leave the church, they are silent toward the public and try and invite change from within.
He is the only truth I need for God to exist. I feel so much love for God and can feel Gods love for us. I just can’t believe that this feeling is some made up human emotion.
Your buddy,
Frank
Unfortunately you are treating a book, as though it can prove itself and it cannot. Yes, although your feelings are real, they could be based on something that is simply not true. You don’t think so?

There are people in the world, whose religion is VERY different than yours, and they feel the same kind of ecstasy. Their feelings are real…but… Do we reincarnate? Should we dedicate our entire lives to buddhist teachings so we end the cycle of reincarnation? Some people spend their ENTIRE lives toward this goal. Obviously, they really believe it and feel strongly about it. Some buddhists will allow themselves to be struck down and killed before they will fight back to defend themselves they feel THAT strongly about it.

Do you think their feelings are based on truth? If not…then what?

Cheers

P.S this was rather long, I struggle to be less verbose, I’m sorry.
 
Dameedna;4505965:
horrible if true, but why would the state give the kids back if that was a possibility?
Because the people who do it are so riddled with fear that they will burn in hell and be ostracized completely from their family and friends, that they will not discuss it. They have been taught, since day one…the outside world is evil and to trust no-one but the prophet. There have been members of the FDLS that have had the courage to leave(or were forced) and have written numerous books.

Unless you can witness the event, and prove that it happened, it cannot stand up in a court of law.
‘breaking a child’s will’ is not a bad thing in itself, because of the nature of my work i see the results of an improper upbringing all the time.
If you break the will of a human, then you are removing their free will and hence their choice. This concept of free will is rather important to both believers and non-believers.

I will follow up by saying that it is one thing to “teach” a child to control their own behaviour through discipline and to completely remove from that child their own identity.
as for the kids i raise, i do the same thing with labor, should they be acting out, or unnecessarily whining, or not applying themselves to their school or house hold duties, then we go work, we haul firewood, buck hay, clean out the ponies stall, and when we run out of real work, we pile bricks, dig holes, or such work. nothing wrong with that at all
I agree, children need to be a part of their family and contribute.

one of the Tricks the FDLS, uses is to stop a child from using the words, me, I , or mine. They are not allowed to “refer” to themselves as a seperate person if they do they are beaten. Their will is to be the same as their father. So instead of “Can I go play father”…it would be “Is it fathers will that thomas goes and plays”. That kind of thing.

They completely strip a human, of their identity and will. I should have added to my previous comment on the water treatment, that they actually deliberately smack the baby to make it cry THEN put it’s head under the water. It is not just a very bad form of discipline, it is done deliberately and systematically to stop a child from crying because the child is supposed to Make sweet with their human fathers, and hence their father in heaven. To cry, is to offend their father and hence God.

It is a systematic attempt to break the human will, from birth and it works. It is an atrocity.
now we agree these means are unacceptable and barbaric, but if true why did the state return these children?
I would suggest reading the book called “escape”. It is written by a woman who is the only woman to ever get out of the FDLS with all 8 of her children.

The state, is bound by laws and rights and unfortunately they do not alway’s protect the victims. The cycle of abuse prevents the victims from helping themselves.

It’s complicated and I suggest you do some reading on it if you are interested. as I cannot explain the full mindset behind it in one forum thread, nor do I actually understand all of it.
what is your source for this information, could it be biased, or is the state of texas unaware of this information?
It started in Utah, not texas and the problem exists whereever the FDLS remain. In Utah, the majority of law enforcement officals , local politicians and business owners ARE FDLS in this area, meaning when a woman tries to run with her children, they are apprehended before they can leave the area. Women are afforded no education, all money given to them by the state for welfare of the kids go to the husband and they are often not allowed to even learn how to drive. They are controlled completely. The FDLS is worse than the Saudi Government when it comes to rights for a female.

The state knows this kind of thing goes on, but without a person claiming it is happening, and being able to prove it WHEN it occurs the law cannot help.

The reaction to the phone call they got, was in some way’s extreme, but you can probably tell they were just waiting for something ANYTHING within the law that gave them the right to investigate.

As to sources of information, there are numerous books written by ex-FDLS members. There are help organizations for the men and women who are removed from teh society.

Another thing that may be of interest to you, is what they do to young males. The religion states, that you will only be granted heaven, by default if you have 3 wives. Of course humans have an approx 50/50 ratio male to female, so how do they achieve this?

By taking teenage boys, age 14 or so, and dumping them on the streets outside of the community as a result of an imagined infraction(you looked at a girl funny, you will leave home and never return).There aren’t “enough” young girls to go around. These boys are referred to as “The lost boys”. Look them up.
 
Aha.

I think Dameedna that you are allowing your justified feelings about the child abuse that occurs (according to you, I don’t know either way) in one cult to interfere with your judgement about the reality of others’ subjective experiences and the reality of God’s existence.
No I don’t think so. I see a world of belief and a lot done to justify the horror that I see within that belief. The justification is usually God.

I see it within catholicism and christianity even if it’s mainstream and I see it in christian history, I simply use the FDLS as an example, because I think most would agree that what they do is terrible, and hence I can use it as an analogy.

A persons experience is just subjective to them. That is what I see, wether it is child abuse, or a lovely notion that an angel came down and shared there love with another.

What it shows me, is that the passion people feel, doesn’t reflect reality necessarily. I think, it is a mirror to the human who experienced it.
I am certain that God himself weeps about the terrible things that are done in His name. He, however is not responsible, weak, misguided and at times, evil people are.
I have never blamed God for anything. I can probably justify most of what goes on in the world, without blaming God one little bit, even the natural world, apart from humanity.

That has never been the reason for my lack of belief, nor my view that spiritual experiences are simply subjective and dependant on the individual, not God itself.
 
Unless you’ve ever been an athiest/skeptic then you probably won’t ever understand the mindset. I do not say that to be mean, It would be like me(as a female) claiming I can understand the mind of a male. I can intellectualize it, but I can never really know it.

I also think there are a lot of people who have made statements that they were “athiests” before, and are now believers, I don’t actually think they were. Or at least, It think there are two distinct groups of non-believers, and it can be difficult to tell the difference between them.
there are hardly any biological differences between theists and non-theists, there is no huge difference in mindsets, such a gulf that one cannot leap it.

as you know i require a reasonable argument, proof, or something sufficient to cause a belief in anything, that skepticism is how i knew no monobloc existed prior to the expansion. skepticism is all good and well, until one is presented with sufficient evidence. as a former atheist (long before it was cool, or even socially acceptable), one who was skeptical until presented actual evidence, i changed my mind when presented with reasonable arguments. i did not ‘stay’ skeptical simply for the sake of being skeptical. i do not cling to any idea that restricts us to a no G-d universe. just for the sake of my idea.

one can refuse all evidence or logic to maintain skepticism, in that case nothing will change skepticism. thats not skepticism after all, thats called blind faith.

so at the bottom of both philosophies is blind faith, unless you are open to all truths, as you say, you are not being honest.

its a zero sum game, you either believe in some creator, or you believe that we popped from nothing

popping from nothing is a much harder idea to square with what we know of physics.
 
Originally Posted by Dameedna:

Putting truth above all else, simply means submitting to something higher than yourself. Truth, is an Ideal…bigger, and more important than the individual.

That’s true, but what I don’t understand from you is your claim to be able to deny what others claim as truth because it hasn’t been proven to you. I’m not talking about relativism here. HappyRevert has told you she has had experiences which have convinced her of the existence of God. You have denigrated her statements by telling her, in effect, she was hallucinating. I presented you with facts about the miracle of Fatima which you ascribed to the simultaneous hellucinations of 50,000 people. When I offered verifiable facts, you offered nothing to refute them, but simply denied them and walked away from the debate. On the basis of those truths, I must wonder if you are as committed to truth as you claim to be.

The question for you here is, can you live with the unknown? Can you accept there may be things we can never figure out, no matter how much we want to believe?

Can you? You’re living with the unknown. The difference between you and a believer is, the believer has things to go on to mitigate ‘the unknown.’ You don’t. All you have is disbelief and an unwillingness to examine fully what is available to you.

…a book claims that Jesus said (I am the truth). I ask this in all sincerity, do you believe everything you read? If not, why believe this? Why do you not believe the Quran?Why do you believe the authors of the bible were telling the truth? Why do you believe that they were representing Jesus and the events around is life accurately? They were human after all.

Not as conclusive a question as you want it to be. We believe what the Gospel writers wrote because the message has been consisent for almost 2000 years. Verbatim. We believe they were telling the truth because they had no reason to lie. The faults and fears they admit are not flattering to them, there is no self-interest in any part of their message and they were not, plainly and simply, not educated or clever enough to pull it off. The ONLY way their evangelization could possible have succeeded was by the hand of God.

The men who wrote the NT were indeed human. They were told by Jesus to take the message to the ends of the earth and that He would be with them until the end of the world. Those men did that and all but one (of 12) died in the process. They were witnesses to what they wrote and, If I am to believe this story is ficton, I have to believe these poor, uneducated fishermen cooked up a lie and agreed to live it out, left their homes and families to give their lives in foreign countries for what they knew to be a lie, that the lie has not merely persisted, but has been spead throughout the world, has been believed by many of the smartest, best educated people who ever lived, that the lie still lives after 2000 years and no one has proven it to be a lie. Some lie! Further, I have to believe ALL the miracles verified by the Catholic Church, some of which have been verified by scientists, are also lies. These lies, too, have a life far beyond any lie in history.

The Koran is not believable because it contradicts itself, its author revised it to conform to his personal life, it was spread through coercion, it cannot survive without coercion and its leaders will not debate its contents. It is not the truth.

There is another possibility here Frank, and that is…He never said it in the first place. The words were put into his mouth, by well meaning humans who were obviously greatly impacted by his life and wanted people to LISTEN to what he was saying.

Those wild assertions are far more fanciful than anything any believer has said here. “Words put into his mouth.”??? Care to back that up? The last part of that is worse than conjecture. Are you presenting it as the truth? If not, why did you write it as truth?

What is Actually known about what Jesus said, is very little. I don’t think the bible has changed that dramatically since it was written, contrary to what some skeptics believe, but The Gospels were written by people trying to portray a meaning.

How do you know that? I know the Jesus Seminar crowd loves to float ideas like that, but what makes their assertions believable to you and the Gospel which, as I said, has a 2000 year old, consistent history, not? Couldn’t be you have a bias against religion, could it?

You don’t seem to know much about the New Testament or the Old. You know only what you think, what you believe and what you’ve been told.

I would suggest reading books by theologians that have chosen to leave the church, rather than support what they now realize to be inaccurate teachings.

Can you name these theologians and say what the alleged ‘inaccurate teachings’ are?

BTW, as I said once before, I have had four supernatural experiences which came from heaven. In each instance I was fully conscious, not on alcohol or drugs and in full possession of my faculties. I KNOW these events occurred and NO ONE can tell be they didn’t. If you say you don’t believe me, you’re not saying you think I’m mistaken. You’re calling me a liar.
 
“I have always found that in studying athiest philosphers and luminaries, that their lives were miserable (I understand this is a generalization, but I believe it is justified). That there was something truly “unredemed” about their emotional lives. Almost crippled. Could this be a necessary concequence of a view point that does away with moral absolutes, and renders life meaningless, or at least renders the search for meaning somewhat arbitrary (whatever floats your boat)?”

AND…whenever totalitarian, atheist regimes take charge, they tend to commit *mass murder *on an industrial scale.
The disproof of atheism is the *hideous suffering *in which it always manifests itself. How could anyone with warm blood coarsing throuh his veins yearn for the atheism of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and/or Castro?

Every single atheist I’ve ever known, has been utterly miserable, depressing to listen to, and a pain-in-the-rump to be around.
 
Originally Posted by Dameedna:
Putting truth above all else, simply means submitting to something higher than yourself. Truth, is an Ideal…bigger, and more important than the individual.

That’s true, but what I don’t understand from you is your claim to be able to deny what others claim as truth because it hasn’t been proven to you. I’m not talking about relativism here. HappyRevert has told you she has had experiences which have convinced her of the existence of God. You have denigrated her statements by telling her, in effect, she was hallucinating. I presented you with facts about the miracle of Fatima which you ascribed to the simultaneous hellucinations of 50,000 people. When I offered verifiable facts, you offered nothing to refute them, but simply denied them and walked away from the debate. On the basis of those truths, I must wonder if you are as committed to truth as you claim to be.

The question for you here is, can you live with the unknown? Can you accept there may be things we can never figure out, no matter how much we want to believe?

Can you? You’re living with the unknown. The difference between you and a believer is, the believer has things to go on to mitigate ‘the unknown.’ You don’t. All you have is disbelief and an unwillingness to examine fully what is available to you.

…a book claims that Jesus said (I am the truth). I ask this in all sincerity, do you believe everything you read? If not, why believe this? Why do you not believe the Quran?Why do you believe the authors of the bible were telling the truth? Why do you believe that they were representing Jesus and the events around is life accurately? They were human after all.

Not as conclusive a question as you want it to be. We believe what the Gospel writers wrote because the message has been consisent for almost 2000 years. Verbatim. We believe they were telling the truth because they had no reason to lie. The faults and fears they admit are not flattering to them, there is no self-interest in any part of their message and they were not, plainly and simply, not educated or clever enough to pull it off. The ONLY way their evangelization could possible have succeeded was by the hand of God.

The men who wrote the NT were indeed human. They were told by Jesus to take the message to the ends of the earth and that He would be with them until the end of the world. Those men did that and all but one (of 12) died in the process. They were witnesses to what they wrote and, If I am to believe this story is ficton, I have to believe these poor, uneducated fishermen cooked up a lie and agreed to live it out, left their homes and families to give their lives in foreign countries for what they knew to be a lie, that the lie has not merely persisted, but has been spead throughout the world, has been believed by many of the smartest, best educated people who ever lived, that the lie still lives after 2000 years and no one has proven it to be a lie. Some lie! Further, I have to believe ALL the miracles verified by the Catholic Church, some of which have been verified by scientists, are also lies. These lies, too, have a life far beyond any lie in history.

The Koran is not believable because it contradicts itself, its author revised it to conform to his personal life, it was spread through coercion, it cannot survive without coercion and its leaders will not debate its contents. It is not the truth.

There is another possibility here Frank, and that is…He never said it in the first place. The words were put into his mouth, by well meaning humans who were obviously greatly impacted by his life and wanted people to LISTEN to what he was saying.

Those wild assertions are far more fanciful than anything any believer has said here. “Words put into his mouth.”??? Care to back that up? The last part of that is worse than conjecture. Are you presenting it as the truth? If not, why did you write it as truth?

What is Actually known about what Jesus said, is very little. I don’t think the bible has changed that dramatically since it was written, contrary to what some skeptics believe, but The Gospels were written by people trying to portray a meaning.

How do you know that? I know the Jesus Seminar crowd loves to float ideas like that, but what makes their assertions believable to you and the Gospel which, as I said, has a 2000 year old, consistent history, not? Couldn’t be you have a bias against religion, could it?

You don’t seem to know much about the New Testament or the Old. You know only what you think, what you believe and what you’ve been told.

I would suggest reading books by theologians that have chosen to leave the church, rather than support what they now realize to be inaccurate teachings.

Can you name these theologians and say what the alleged ‘inaccurate teachings’ are?

BTW, as I said once before, I have had four supernatural experiences which came from heaven. In each instance I was fully conscious, not on alcohol or drugs and in full possession of my faculties. I KNOW these events occurred and NO ONE can tell be they didn’t. If you say you don’t believe me, you’re not saying you think I’m mistaken. You’re calling me a liar.

LOL!!! 🙂
 
How could anyone with warm blood coarsing throuh his veins yearn for the atheism of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and/or Castro?

Every single atheist I’ve ever known, has been utterly miserable, depressing to listen to, and a pain-in-the-rump to be around.
bingo, bango, bong!🙂
 
Dameedna,

I’m still trying to wrap my mind around putting truth above all other things. Does this mean you put truth above reason too?

I’m just trying to understand.

Frank
 
"I, V.I. Lenin, shall set you free from the torments of dreaded religion, the horrible, horrible thing that it is…

…and order the CHEKA to put a bullet in the back of your head."
 
"I, V.I. Lenin, shall set you free from the torments of dreaded religion, the horrible, horrible thing that it is…

…and order the CHEKA to put a bullet in the back of your head."
yeah, they never seem to remember what atheism means in practice
 
yeah, they never seem to remember what atheism means in practice
Spanish Inquisition? Oh wait, that was the “Church” of Christ…

Even Jesus’ death was caused by religious power seeking.

“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”.
 
Spanish Inquisition? Oh wait, that was the “Church” of Christ…

Even Jesus’ death was caused by religious power seeking.

“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”.
how can you begin to compare the inquistion to the atheist regimes

inquisition = 4,000 deaths over 140 years

soviets = 20,000,000 deaths in 35 years

ww2 = 50,000,000 total

mao = 40,000,000

pol pot = 2,000,000

as you can see these rough numbers total 112,000,000 people in this century alone.

which boils down to a 1 to 28,000 ratio. hardly comparable, atheism places no value on human life, because of that it is directly responsible for genocide of millions of innocents, no their is truly nothing human in humanism

these numbers were taken from this site -Death Tolls for the Major Wars and Atrocities of the Twentieth Century
 
I’m going to step in here to try and add a thrid perspective. There is much discussion about personal experience and reality. As a former believer, I can tell you that I have had experiences that at one time convinced me there was a God - the Judeo Christian one. I have since had other experiences that have led me to re-examine my beliefs and the assumptions I made about my experiences. I fully admit that I do not know the “TRUTH”, nor do I believe it is possible to do so with our limited human capacity. Unlike atheists, I do believe in the paranormal/supernatural. Some of my experiences do defy explanation other than one that is paranormal; however, I no longer credit any particular power/god with their causation.

Regarding the Bible, I have done some reading by scholars who left Christianity as a result of the conclusions their work led them to. Once I lost my fear of “God” I was able to really examine the basis of Judeo Christianity and realized that there was simply no more reason to believe this set of myths over any other. I realize my conditioning as a Christian set me up to make the assumptions that I did about my experiences - I was pre-disposed to do so based on the belief system I had been taught and accepted.

Now that I have let all of that go (once you don’t believe, you don’t believe - as has been stated before - I can’t talk myself in Santa either), my horizons have expanded greatly and I think that most religions are very limiting (probably by necessity as control seems to be a huge part of most theologies). I belive in many levels/planes of existence and find the possibilities fascinating. I believe there is much more to existance than our current 3-dimensional “reality”. But I find the idea of a personal god to be not only unbelievable but also unnecessary.

I honestly don’t mean to offend anyone - most of my loved ones are Christians and I would not try to talk them out of their faith. But we can only live our own lives and we have to do what makes sense to us. I don’t know a single non-believer who is just out to annoy folks. I think, when you boil it all down, we are doing the best we can - all of us. And that is what we need to understand about each other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top