Is Atheism the new way?

[Filius99993]

She’s right, most people aren’t going to agree with you on various topics, and you’d do well to at least hear them out, see if you can reach understanding and find common ground where you do agree, because it’ll make life a lot easier for all concerned.

This cuts both ways: the argument from dissent or even persecution is just as useless as the argument from popularity. You are no more correct because people don’t like what you have to say; if you’re correct, you are so in spite of that.

I realize that, but she has no clue as to what she is doing… I don’t like going with the norm, and she doesn’t either, but she’s pretty blind to what to do. But her best argument against mine is that people aren’t going to agree with me. Still…

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I think we’ve already established that you’re not very quick on the uptake.

Good way to run a discussion. Your abject rudeness more than makes it clear that you have nothing IMPORTANT to say.
{QUOTE]

What I hate is the phenomenon of Catholic dissent – on the “left” and the “right” – which erupted in its wake and continues to rear its ugly head. Neither side gives assent what the Council documents themselves say. The “right” (SSPX, etc.) judges them to be invalid, and the “left” (Küng, “Earth Mother” Chittister, Commonweal, etc.) distorts their message.

I had thought you might have a modicum of actual information to impart. I doubt you have but the most basic understanding of anything but the perceived brilliance of your own mind.

 

[MarcellusW]

Good way to run a discussion. Your abject rudeness more than makes it clear that you have nothing IMPORTANT to say.

I had thought you might have a modicum of actual information to impart. I doubt you have but the most basic understanding of anything but the perceived brilliance of your own mind.

Whoa Whoa. Keep it civil. You just did the very same thing you got mad at him for.

 

[bogeydogg]

The issue is not the rightness but the facts of change. I do think that there is a redefining of faith and spirituality. That is why I believe that some churches are finding their numbers dwindling and where additions are being made, they tend to be ideologically different. Pentacostalism and evangelism seem on the rise in Catholicism. As so many leave the Church in Europe, the upswing seems a good deal more rigid in its orientation. Those falling away from organizied religion seem to be finding an evolving spiritual connection. I think religion is always evolving and changing. Some for the better, some for the worse. Over time, i think there are upsurges, downsurges and times of calm. I don’t think it’s anything new, but I do see a growing common awareness of oneness being expressed. Those churches who choose not to promote interfaith dialog will I predict grow smaller. I don’t think its atheism at all. It’s a redefinion of what it means to believe in God and be connected to God that is at work.

My question is what do you mean by, “interfaith”?

Do you mean interdenominational within the confines of the Christian faith?

Or do you mean religious federalism where all faiths get an equal say and we pretend everyone has something valid to offer?

 

[bogeydogg]

The reason I ask is because we cannot rationally assert that all religions have a core of truth because the cores of each differ so very radically as to preclude the notion that they may all somehow be valid.

Take for example the Jesus problem.

1.) Christians believe that Jesus is Messiah and God incarnate who will come at the end of all things to judge the living and the dead and be crowned in glory as the sovereign God of the universe.

2.) Muslims believe that Jesus was a prophet but certainly not God and neither is He the Savior who will bring about judgment on the Earth at the end of days.

3.) Jews believe that Jesus was a man and nothing more; an itinerate preacher who was executed for inciting violence against Rome and blasphemy against God.

Now there are only two conclusions which can rationally be drawn about this concerning these three religions.

1.) They are all wrong.

2.) One is correct to the absolute exclusion of the other two. Period!

There can be no middle ground on this and neither can there be, “Well that’s what your faith tells you and that’s true for you but not for me.” Because my faith tells me that every other faith is necessarily false because there is only one God and He had shown Himself to man through Christ Jesus out Lord. So if anyone would assert that my truth is true then they are necessarily asserting that they themselves are false. It is unavoidable.

The point is, we can talk about the changing shape of faith and understanding all we may want to, but those who do so and then pretend to still be Christians are lying to themselves and committing the very apostacy which St. Peter warned would get them thrown into Hell.

Now you may disagree with me, but don’t pander to me and tell me that is true for me and not others because it is either right or it is wrong, it can be no other.

 

[trichocereus]

Nope, atheism is not a new way… It is nothing new under the sun… Basically, the motion of atheism is inspired by Satan, because he’s biggest lies are that there is no God, as well as there is no evil, devil, or whatever you call it… There can be no universal truth - even from logical point of view it’s not possible… Universal truth means there is no truth at all… What remains is chaos… The purpose of all this is clear: when you stop believing you tend to perceive human mind as an ultimate source of salvation… I would risk saying, which I believe is true, that atheism is just an expression of inner egoism… There is no such a thing like atheism… An atheist is a person who just closes his eyes in order to persuade himself/herself there is nothing out there so there’s no need to keep your eyes open… This may be truth for their own inner world – but is our own world everything? Or, imagine a person who willingly deprives himself/herself of a sense of seeing… There is a wise Taoist saying which states that “a name is just a guest of reality” – so whatever way you chooses to call something, it doesn’t change the simple fact that the thing exists… There are people who intelligently chooses what they find plausible in the Bible and refuse anything else that goes against their own desires… It’s just a plain ignorance, isn’t it? Atheism is an extreme form of it… We have to remember that God does not need our prayers as much as we do need His help and His salvation… So, an atheist may say to me “throw out your rosary, it’s useless” or “stop praying, it’s senseless”… My only reply would be “Ok, but what can you give me instead”? As a matter of fact, there is nothing they can give instead…

Making things even more harsh, atheism is also a form of Satanism… As mentioned previously, one of Satan’s technique is to persuade people that not only God does not exist, but that Satan doesn’t exist either… If someone throws out the reality of spiritual world, then inevitably the conclusion must be that human soul is also non-existent – we are merely animals, a flesh… But this fails to explain many mysteries around… Being atheist must be more confusing than believing in God… Atheism leaves us with many more questions than a faith in God…. It’s like believing in UFO, reincarnation, etc. - the only purpose is to entice people away from God, offering some mirage of salvation, technological salvation (as in case of UFO cults), waisting your time (like reincarnation and predestination - because that’s you karma, that’s your future, you cannot do anything about it) - atheism is just another lie in a broad array of lies that include magic, occultism, astrology, etc.

That something is popular? It proves nothing… Remember what Jesus said: that a way to damnation is wide and easy… The Church may be dwindling, but in fact, I don’t think that’s the case… Or, it has always been the case… The Church is under attack, accused of being intolerant and ignorant… But usually, people who say so are more intolerant and ignorant than the Church they accuse… We cannot forget that it was the Church who gave to modern Europe universities and supported science and thinking… There were some dark pages in history, but it is all made up of humans… If they were infallible and perfect there would be no need for the Christ’s coming and so on… On of the common arguments against the Church is, for instance, the witches’ hunt – but again, as I dwelled more into the matter I discovered, much to my admiration and surprise, that the majority of the Church was against it, and that, in some way it was a plan to discredit the Church… I believe that the Holy Spirit of God is guiding the Church, so simply, there is no way to destroy it… It will always be a triumphant Church…

Answering you question: ‘Is the falling numbers in Christianity and the growing atheism proof there is no God?’ No, I think it proves something different: that there is God indeed… Believers were always under attack… Many people prefer atheism because it is easy… Faith is difficult, keeping you faith is difficult – and it does change you, your personality, your soul. You discover, at some point, you feel no need for many things you did before, you see how reality is functioning and what the most important things in you life are made of: love, love, and again love…

God is not forbidding us in choosing our own ways… that’s free will…

As to my comparison of atheism and Satanism, I would like to state that I’m in no way a fundamentalist… What I say comes from my experience: for many years I was a practitioner of occultism, demonology and other forms of false religions and I know the ways of the enemy… I thank God He allowed me to come back to Him… - And that’s another important factor… Faith is a gift, faith is a grace… If people are looking after their own ways, there is no purpose in giving them a strong faith – because they are not looking for answers… They are just expecting miracles… they demand a miracle, a sign – again Jesus’ words: ‘the sign shall not be given to this generation’… To discover God we need to prepare our minds and souls… Purify them… Don’t expect miracles… It’s like Bob Marley sang:

Most people think,
Great God will come from the skies,
Take away everything
And make everybody feel high.

Then they would believe, right? Again, and again, and over again, Jesus words come to mind: “Blessed are those who didn’t see but believe’. That’s what faith is all about…

Thanks for reading this, thanks for you time…

I greet everyone on this forum in the name of Jesus, Our Lord and Savior.
Be blessed!

 

[Newbie2]

It’s not a proof that there is no God. There is no proof that there is no God just as there is no proof that God exists. I think people are thinking more today about christianity and questioning it instead of blindly accepting it as true.

I think it’s easier to prove that God exists than that he does not exist, and proofs do indeed exist for the existence of God. Whether or not one accepts the proofs or arguments is entirely up to them.

Why don’t you tell that to my AP European History teacher. She tells me on my beliefs of morality that “most people aren’t going to agree with you.” I don’t think she believes in any particular Truth. And it’s really depressing, because there isn’t anyone person or truth to guide her (except for Joel Osteen, blech )

Good for you. This is a situation where you can teach your teacher something.

Atheism is just a vacuum into which belief forms of some kind or another will flow.
.

I like that description

Whoa Whoa. Keep it civil. You just did the very same thing you got mad at him for.

Agreed. Group hug. :grouphug:

 

[Starwynd]

Atheism is a way that is far older than religion because there has always been people who don’t believe in God. It is in fact, older than religion itself. Religion grew out of atheism because people wanted to believe in something more than what they were. Religion also grew out of humanity’s search for answers in the way the world worked.

So it is not the “new” way.

 

[trichocereus]

Atheism is a way that is far older than religion because there has always been people who don’t believe in God. It is in fact, older than religion itself. Religion grew out of atheism because people wanted to believe in something more than what they were. Religion also grew out of humanity’s search for answers in the way the world worked.

So it is not the “new” way.

If it comes to institutionalized forms of religion, yes, atheism is older, but on the other hand, from the very beginning people believed in God, and it’s His mystery that throughout the world every tribe and every nation had had a natural feeling or sense of God’s existence… It’s just a part of human nature… So, in this case, atheism, is just an opposite of religious belief and is as old as religion itself… But again, it leads us to the same point: who is fighitng God from the very beginning? Who is against religion?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Whoa Whoa. Keep it civil. You just did the very same thing you got mad at him for.

To the contrary, I will not stand by while someone is rude and insulting to me. Ad hominem remarks are used as an excuse for a real argument. Enough said, I don’t converse with the gentleman simple because he is not one.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

My question is what do you mean by, “interfaith”?

Do you mean interdenominational within the confines of the Christian faith?

Or do you mean religious federalism where all faiths get an equal say and we pretend everyone has something valid to offer?

Actually it would mean both. Certainly JPII made it clear that non Christian faiths have things to offer and bring a rich tradition of knowledge and theology to the discussion. We need not “pretend” anything. To assume that God ONLY works through the church is to be rather presumpuous I would say. In any case, there will never be meaningful agreement without dialogue. That is why so many are disgusted with organized religion. The idiocy of everyone claiming that they are the “one” is simply not acceptable. I daresare though that I can gain more from speaking to a buddhist or hindu than I could from a fundie baptist.

 

[Wintermute]

Superstition diminishes over time as education improves, but I don’t think we will ever be rid of it. Humans are superstitious by nature. We have to learn to reason.

 

[bogeydogg]

Actually it would mean both. Certainly JPII made it clear that non Christian faiths have things to offer and bring a rich tradition of knowledge and theology to the discussion. We need not “pretend” anything. To assume that God ONLY works through the church is to be rather presumpuous I would say. In any case, there will never be meaningful agreement without dialogue. That is why so many are disgusted with organized religion. The idiocy of everyone claiming that they are the “one” is simply not acceptable. I daresare though that I can gain more from speaking to a buddhist or hindu than I could from a fundie baptist.

Fine, but whatever any faith has to offer, as my earlier example illustrates, they cannot possibly all offer truth. That being so, any sort of interfaith dialogue must necessarily be restricted to comparative studies but not an examination of universal truth found in every faith. Unless of course the truth discussed is that all faiths are false.

As far as being presumptuous about one faith being true, the very nature of faiths is that my faith is true and no other. BTW, this includes Hindi and Buddhism who although they may fudge about the nature of truth they certainly teach the tenets of their own faiths are true and are to be believed so make of that what you will.

Also, I would ask, if you think it is exclusive for there to be only one way, consider the God of the Bible and His absolute holiness and ask yourself why there should be any way at all?

 

[Filius99993]

Superstition diminishes over time as education improves, but I don’t think we will ever be rid of it. Humans are superstitious by nature. We have to learn to reason.

And Rousseau (THE educator) thought that atheists were mentally unstable.

 

[Karmastrike]

Its more like “I’m to lazy to practice, Atheism is easy”.

 

[Namesake]

If they’re really saying that then they should be able to show through science and reason that God doesn’t exist. But they can’t do that and most of them know it.

A negative cannot be proved.

 

[Wintermute]

And Rousseau (THE educator) thought that atheists were mentally unstable.

A lot of people think a lot of stupid things. What’s your point?

 

[MindOverMatter]

Superstition diminishes over time as education improves, but I don’t think we will ever be rid of it. Humans are superstitious by nature. We have to learn to reason.

What do you mean by superstition, and what is your reference point by which you know the difference between reasonable and unreasonable.
FONT]

 

[Dameedna]

Its more like “I’m to lazy to practice, Atheism is easy”.

Athiesm is easy? Lets see now shall we.

1. There is no ultimate justice in the world. No punishment for the bad, or reward for the good. The poor and the starving are just that. They live horrible lives, then blink out of existance.

And the athiest watches in horror, tries to do what they can but realizes they simply cannot fix all the problems or injustices of the world.

1. When we die, we die. There is no imortality, there is no heavenly reward. We become exactly the same after we die as before we were born. We don’t exist.

The Athiest lives with this reality every day, with no comfort in a promised afterlife.

1. We are alone. We go through life, hopefully we are lucky enough to be born in a peaceful country and we give life the best go we can. There is no-one protecting us, no-one watching out for us and at any moment a huge meteor could strike the planet and wipe out all life, and there is no-one to do anything about it.

The athiest continues to live, knowing that they are vulnerable and very alone.

1. Life is meaningless. The Universe has no point or purpose to it. It may have alway’s existed in some form, but we do not yet know. conciousness,(Ie human self-awareness) is the biggest cosmic Joke of all. No-matter what we do in our lives, eventually the universe will disappear in some way, and nothing we have done will make one iota of difference.

The Athiest lives with the threat of Nihlism every day.

I could go on and on, but I won’t. If you think that athiesm is the lazy easy way, then I don’t think you truly understand it very well. It is much easier to 'believe" in what we want, to believe in what brings us comfort, than to believe in nothing. It’s easier to believe in a loving protective father, than not. It is easier to believe in immortality than not. And it is easier to believe that justice one day will prevail than not.

The only part of atheism that is easier, is that you don’t have to work so hard at trying to convince yourself that something is true, when it’s not.

 

[Dameedna]

What is interesting about this new atheist movement and criticism is how the professional philosophers – both atheists and theists – are leaving it well alone. .

I’m not sure where you get this from. Go into a large book store, and you will find a myriad of books by philosophers that are “against religion”(actually the name of a book I read recently) and against monotheism etc.

These are not vitrolic aggressive philosophers, but they DO enter into the debate and they do not agree with religion.

In fact, I think you will find there are more and more books being written on this subject than ever before.

So no, it’s not being left alone. People aren’t ostracized anymore for being athiests, the debate simply no longer remains in the domain of the philosophers.