How do you feel about atheists?

[Lou2U]

I thought the same when I first started reading this forum. It is a good sign though, of love for God. You don’t want to offend those you love, and having a concern for the relationship with those whom you love, is not something to pity. The world could use a lot more of this type of concern.

I agree having concern is a good thing, but it does make me pity those who can’t see the difference between a sin and their own thoughts. There was a question about whether picking flowers was a sin recently, for example. It makes me sad that these people can’t see the difference, even when they have help from a Spritual Director.

Lou

 

[RebeccaJ]

I agree having concern is a good thing, but it does make me pity those who can’t see the difference between a sin and their own thoughts. There was a question about whether picking flowers was a sin recently, for example. It makes me sad that these people can’t see the difference, even when they have help from a Spritual Director.

Lou

I don’t know the person or circumstances, so have no opinion.

 

[MrEmpiricism]

Of course, if one doesn’t believe in a cure, one obviously never searches.

Life is a grand search dear friend, unearth the mysteries to discover if there is more to just physical existence.

One can, of course, spend their lives looking for “physical things” which is all well and good, but in order to discover God, one has to earnestly believe there is a God.

To discover a Higgs Bosom, one has to earnestly believe there is a Higgs Bosom.

The conceptual framework is exactly the same.

The journey of discovery is an awe-abounding one for each one of us

.

It is not the same, what you are calling beliefs in regard to science are actually hypothesis and scientific hypothesis are, or at least should be if you practice good science, based on a strong backbone of evidence. Justifying ones hypothesis it a critical part of a good research methodology. The acceptance of the Higgs Bosom, prior to actually finding it, was born out of empirical evidence. Finding it was just the icing on the cake.

Much like I don’t have to witness a murder to know it happened, matching bullets to guns, DNA, finger prints etc are good enough evidence.

 

[MrEmpiricism]

Prayer doesn’t harm you. You don’t believe it does anything at all. So why be offended?

Believing you think for others can be harmful. But I don’t believe that was your intent. You just want people to stop praying. My husband, the godless , once said “there will be no praying in this house!”. I said, “whatever”.That was it, the bluster all gone, and we have lived happily ever after.

It is irrational to come to a Catholic forum and then get all offended about someone praying. We do pray in this “house”.

I can guarantee you any Catholic reading this thread is praying for you, just not telling you. What you gonna do about it?

God bless you.

-Rebecca

I did not mean think for people in that context. I don’t want anyone to stop praying, I just don’t want to be prayed for and I find it offensive when people offer to do so. It implies that I somehow don’t get it, that I need help, that I am missing something. When the truth of the matter is that the subjects of faith, belief, and knowledge are subjects that I have spend a massive amount of time researching and contemplating, in fact I would be willing to bet I have spent as much time studying them, if not more, than most of the people on this forum.

 

[MrEmpiricism]

I know, that is why I said it is trolling. To come to a Catholic forum to just give the “party line”, and not converse, looks like trolling to me.

But I admit my judgement may have been too hasty.

I am certainly not trolling, like I said these are subjects I spend I great deal of time researching. IMO instead of us all posting on safety of our ‘home forums’ for want of a better expression, we should in fact be engaging with those that oppose our views not those that share them. After all how can any of us hope to find real truth if we don’t interact with those that disagree with us and challenge our positions?

 

[MrEmpiricism]

Have you not seen a study where the patients who were prayed for had better results with their treatments? That would be empirical evidence. Placebo or not, it’s empirical evidence.

I have seen that, I have also seen many studies that attempted to repeat the results but failed. Plus the medical studies all fall flat on their face when challenged by one simple question IMO… Why is it that prayer only works for conditions that medial science can cure or conditions that we know spontaneous regression can occur? For example, why is god incapable of curing amputees? Surly it was prayer and god at work we would expect to see the same % of healing across all areas of illness including amputees.

 

[MrEmpiricism]

Faithdancer was spot on, in my estimation. If there is an atheist that doesn’t know comparing faith in God to Santa, the Easter Bunny, Zeuss, Thor…is not addressing what a person of faith experiences, but rather is denigrating their faith, then I might agree with you.

Points can be made without pushing well known buttons. Otherwise know as cheap shots. Usually meant to provoke. Obviously, the strongly held beliefs of Faithdancer were not taken seriously, let alone respected.

What else is there to do, but pray for those who offend you. Certainly, a fruitful conversation that reflects mutual respect is not going to occur.

Unfortunately you have both misunderstood the point of that post, perhaps I should have been more clear.

I was not comparing the Christian God to anything, I was pointing out that what was supplied was not evidence but quite simply unfounded assertions. Consequently, if that is the standard of evidence that one requires to accept a claim then they would be accepting all sorts of claims, like the existence of thor for example. For I can equally support the existence of thor through such assertions, in fact in this case the exact same assertions.

So no, I was not comparing anything, and I was not having a cheap shot, I was pointing out that simply asserting something is not evidence.

 

[Doormouse]

MrEmpiricism

I see you are not happy with people saying they will say a prayer for you.
how would you feel if some one wishes you all the very best ? or ill keep you in my thoughts?

 

[MrEmpiricism]

MrEmpiricism

I see you are not happy with people saying they will say a prayer for you.
how would you feel if some one wishes you all the very best ? or ill keep you in my thoughts?

I have no issue with that, and as pointed by Mike from NJ prayer can be fine depending on the context. I am actually a little surprised by how one comment has been blown out of proportion.

 

[Son_of_Niall]

I have no issue with that, and as pointed by Mike from NJ prayer can be fine depending on the context. I am actually a little surprised by how one comment has been blown out of proportion.

Your remark came off to me as implying praying and thinking are not the same. You may have not meant it to be offensive, but it was. Praying and meditating are the most healthy of mental exercises, a treadmill for the brain.

 

[MrEmpiricism]

Your remark came off to me as implying praying and thinking are not the same. You may have not meant it to be offensive, but it was. Praying and meditating are the most healthy of mental exercises, a treadmill for the brain.

I did mean it to be snarky, because the person was being very patronising so I returned the favour.

 

[Doormouse]

I have no issue with that, and as pointed by Mike from NJ prayer can be fine depending on the context. I am actually a little surprised by how one comment has been blown out of proportion.

so me being a Catholic/Christian, when I say ill keep you in my thoughts, how would you take it? like I was praying? Or I am at work say, and I say " I do hope that MrEmpiricism is ok" who am I saying it to?

 

[MrEmpiricism]

so me being a Catholic/Christian, when I say ill keep you in my thoughts, how would you take it? like I was praying? Or I am at work say, and I say " I do hope that MrEmpiricism is ok" who am I saying it to?

I would have no problem, there are many contexts where it is fine and there are some where it is very patronising, like the one in this thread. But like I said I feel this has all been blown out of proportion.

 

[estesbob]

I am certainly not trolling, like I said these are subjects I spend I great deal of time researching. IMO instead of us all posting on safety of our ‘home forums’ for want of a better expression, we should in fact be engaging with those that oppose our views not those that share them. After all how can any of us hope to find real truth if we don’t interact with those that disagree with us and challenge our positions?

I am curious , who did you come to these forums to try and convince that there is no God. ?Forum members or yourself ?

 

[MrEmpiricism]

I am curious , who did you come to these forums to try and convince that there is no God. ?Forum members or yourself ?

I am curious, how did you reach the conclusion that I am here to try and convince people that there is no God? I am here to try to understand why people accept the claim that there is a god.

As for trying to convince myself that there is no god, that is a rather silly statement when you break it down, don’t you think?

 

[Doormouse]

I would have no problem, there are many contexts where it is fine and there are some where it is very patronising, like the one in this thread. But like I said I feel this has all been blown out of proportion.

 

[Doormouse]

I better answer the question in the O P.
how do I feel about atheists? I find that there are great people.(mostly)
but you get the odd nut job, same as every walk of life really.
the atheist nut job is more anarchistic in my eyes. but hey ho, on with life.

 

[jc4751]

How do you feel about atheists? Do you pity them? Hope for them? Argue with them? Pray for them?

There probably needs to be a definition of what sort of atheist we’re talking about. There is a real divide between atheists who simply don’t believe, but don’t aggressively attack the religious views of others. These are people you can have a discussion with and at least make a reasonable case for the existence of God to, if not convincing them.

Then there are the anti-theists who can’t or won’t tolerate religious practice or belief. Most of the time, you can’t have a reasonable discussion with them, because their atheism is what defines them, rather than being a component of their thought. It is my thought that these people will be the ones to incite a new wave of persecution in the Western world, as the Church continues to lose its foothold on the culture.

With sets groups, though, there is always an personal undercurrent of revulsion for me, because these are people who have willingly rejected God, for whatever reason, and if you reject God, you are opening yourself up to something else. What is also more striking for me about atheists is that they really are seeking desperately to believe in something, but have a priori ruled out believing in the only thing which is really able to bring anyone solace, a union with God. The ramblings of many atheists about the natural world flirt with pantheism, even if they don’t explicitly state it as such.

Additionally, what also strikes me is that the atheist will willingly mock religious people by saying that atheists have no need for “magic sky fairies” or somesuch, or a “desperate need to believe in something to give their lives meaning,” or a dozen other reasons. What never factors into the discussion is an honest recognition of the most common motivation of religious people – a desire to do good and live in a holy way which cannot be attained except through the introduction of God into one’s life.

In the end, all we can really do is pray for them, live a Godly life as an example, and bear witness to our faith by letting it inform all aspects of our lives. The most significant factor in the early growth of the Church was due to the willingness of early Christians to bear witness not only in the arena, but also by caring for the sick and dying when no one else would. These things make far more impact than the most finely crafted theological discussion.

 

[JD1789]

I have seen that, I have also seen many studies that attempted to repeat the results but failed. Plus the medical studies all fall flat on their face when challenged by one simple question IMO… Why is it that prayer only works for conditions that medial science can cure or conditions that we know spontaneous regression can occur? For example, why is god incapable of curing amputees? Surly it was prayer and god at work we would expect to see the same % of healing across all areas of illness including amputees.

It’s certainly not good evidence by any means. I certainly don’t base my faith on the miracles of the medical world. If miracles happened in proportion to prayer, they wouldn’t be miracles but more like magic or some sort of spiritual formula. They are gifts, not rewards. It only takes one proven miracle to show that God exists, but one must disprove a nearly infinite amount to show that God doesn’t exist. Even in the reported miracles of Jesus, matter has never been spontaneously created for a person who already had it. It’s possible God won’t recreate a part of the body because he already has created it. To ask for the miracle of regeneration of an amputee when Jesus himself never did it makes no sense to me.

When it comes to spontaneous medical abnomalies that suggest the presence of God, I am most impressed with the instances of stigmatas, but that can be saved for a later time.

It seems you are busy with discussions about whether or not you are a troll, so I won’t continue to throw arguments at you. Maybe when a new thread comes up, I’ll ask you some more questions.

Thanks for being on this forum! It’s great to see other alternative thoughts and ideas.

 

[MrEmpiricism]

It’s certainly not good evidence by any means. I certainly don’t base my faith on the miracles of the medical world. If miracles happened in proportion to prayer, they wouldn’t be miracles but more like magic or some sort of spiritual formula. They are gifts, not rewards. It only takes one proven miracle to show that God exists, but one must disprove a nearly infinite amount to show that God doesn’t exist. Even in the reported miracles of Jesus, matter has never been spontaneously created for a person who already had it. It’s possible God won’t recreate a part of the body because he already has created it. To ask for the miracle of regeneration of an amputee when Jesus himself never did it makes no sense to me.

When it comes to spontaneous medical abnomalies that suggest the presence of God, I am most impressed with the instances of stigmatas, but that can be saved for a later time.

It seems you are busy with discussions about whether or not you are a troll, so I won’t continue to throw arguments at you. Maybe when a new thread comes up, I’ll ask you some more questions.

Thanks for being on this forum!** It’s great to see other alternative thoughts and ideas**.

There is nothing I find more boring that sitting about with people who agree with me and us all patting each other on the back. I like to talk to people who don’t agree with me, to challenge and be challenged. IMO critical analysis is the path to truth.