Serious misconception about atheism

[AnAtheist]

Maggie:

So the question is, why do you participate in the discussion? Is your point to convince us that God doesn’t exist? Or is your hope to be convinced that He does?

My point is to clear up some misconceptions people have about atheists or atheism. Ignorance about other people’s motives or beliefs leads to less understanding. I see nothing wrong in trying to understand each other better.

When I first read some posts here, they were filled with misconceptions about atheism, I thought it was time to participate.

And, @kamz: Yes, I enjoy a decent debate.

 

[Trinitatem]

Monarchy,

You do realize, of course, that Jesus spoke in parables quite often to the masses, and to the disciples he often did things to illustrate his point. The parable of the fig tree is to illustrate faith. (Interesting you should pick this one).
Matthew 21:21-22:

Jesus answered them, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only will you do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,’ it will be done. Whatever you ask for in prayer with faith, you will receive.”

(Imagine what you could do if you “realized” God’s existence, and from that had the faith to move mountains, and receive in your prayers what you ask.)
He did not kill the fig tree for just growing fruits out of season.

By the way, and I address all those who respond in kind, these forums are great for the faith, because what they do is force us to find replies - to investigate our faith to defend it. What then we uncover promotes our closeness to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I think, not a waste of time, but an exploration and education of the faith.

 

[AnAtheist]

Trinitatem:

Let me ask this. What would it take for an atheist to “realize” that God does exist? Facts?
Written proof?
God Himself?
At one point in time, God could make Himself known to you. And if He did, would you “realize” then His existence?

Oh yes, that would do. Written proof - if it was some kind of user manual.

Trinitatem:

Jesus was either what he said he was, or he was a madman. In those times, if you were mad, you acted in ways entirely different from how Christ acted.

Not that bifurcation again :yawn:. He could have been a liar, the gospel writers may have misinterpreted him, YOU may have misinterpreted him, etc…

 

[kallen]

AnAtheist wrote: "My point is to clear up some misconceptions people have about atheists or atheism. Ignorance about other people’s motives or beliefs leads to less understanding. I see nothing wrong in trying to understand each other better."
**

**Fair enough!:clapping: **

(I’ve received less consideration from dogmatic denominationalists)

K

 

[darcee]

I have long wondered WHY atheists CARE what people who have faith think about them. Why even bother showing up on a board like this? Is it to prove you are right? Is it to mock those with faith in a higher being? What is the point?

-D

 

[Trinitatem]

AnAtheist:

Could have, would have, may have…Is it that you’re not sure? To be honest, I think we could argue these points until the coming of Christ.(my reality). I’m not going to ask you if you’ve read the bible, as this is my “user manual.”

I do think you may be rejecting some undeniable truths, but that may not matter to you.

I think we all have an understanding of your reality. Thank you for this. It helps to strengthen our faith, for, as I had said earlier, it forces us to look deeper into our faith for answers to questions we have not faced yet. And I do think we all need to constantly educate ourselves so when temptation arises in our life, we can easily stamp it out and spread the word. I value this as it promotes me on my own spiritual journey.

 

[Shiann]

AnAtheist:

Yes, I could subscribe to that.
The problem is, that most theists think that atheists are willfully ignoring god(s) despite the evidence. You have pointed it out quite well, one makes decisions upon the evidence (summarising experiences, teachings, observations,litarature) and then comes to a conclusion.

It is not like seeing two paths, one leading to God, the other to atheism, and then choosing one. It is more like considering those two paths, and then conclude only one is valid. I see a big difference here.

I understand.

So if it is the case that people take in information, and then make decisions about the information in order to sort it in their minds for a following choice (if one becomes available); do most athiests live life:

-accumulating information awaiting the opportunity to accept a creator avoiding the choice until that moment?

or do they live life:

-deciding at a certain time in their past, when they have concluded there is no reasonable evidence to feel the need to choose to follow a religion?

or

-another reason?

Thank you for your honesty and openness to discuss this. I have athiest aquaintences who get VERY defensive when we get into discussions similar to this. I would like to understand their position better- beyond what they think to be true, but to know what train of thought probably brought them to this point.

I won’t kid you, I’m Catholic all the way, and hope for the conversion of all my athiest acquaintences. But I also know that understanding is a key to that conversion. I’ve not read any posts from any athiests on this forum who would completely reject the existence of God, in fact I’ve read most of them are open to the idea if the evidence presented itself.

As an aside, one of the big pieces missing from this discussion is the big F word: “Faith”.

Many athiests I know accuse me of being led around by my nose because of my Faith. (Faith being defined as my belief in God does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Not: faith being defined as my religion.)

I try to ask them what they think of making choices completely or mostly on Faith- but many times the conversation has seriously deteriorated by that point. So since this conversation is still intact- what is your position on faith? Is it a real and valid thing? Can we make good decisions based solely on faith? Or is it (as one of my atheist friends say) an idea conjured up by religious leaders to maintain control and herd the followers?

As you know many people choose their religious life based ONLY on faith. Others use the evidence of science as well as faith to embrace religion. So there is a variance in religious people’s mental ‘need’ for faith.

Could we say that just as there are some people who require only faith to be religious, that conversely, there are people who require almost all evidence to the reality of God?

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

AnAtheist:

…atheism is not a religion. That’s another common misconception. Atheism lacks all attributes of a religion, namely faith in some sorts of dieties, worshipping, a canon, priests…

atheism: denial of or disbelief in the existence of God.

religion: a belief, activity, or cause pursued with fervor and devotion.

faith: belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of someone or something.

I’ll agree that atheism is not an organized religion. It is a religion however if you claim the following:

Deny the existence of God and believe this with fervor and are devoted to this worldview. If you believe this to be true you are a person of faith.

 

[AnAtheist]

darcee:

I have long wondered WHY atheists CARE what people who have faith think about them. Why even bother showing up on a board like this? Is it to prove you are right? Is it to mock those with faith in a higher being? What is the point?

Misconception leads to misunderstanding, misunderstanding leads to quarrels, and quarrels may ultimately lead to all kinds of atrocities.
I feel much safer, when the common theist recognises what’s behind atheism instead of thinking atheists are psychopathic, satanic, mass-murdering, child-sacrificing evil-doers, who deserve to burn on a stake. That is a strong motive to care for what believers think of me. I do not care at all, what diety they believe in.

 

[AnAtheist]

Shiann:

do most athiests live life:

-accumulating information awaiting the opportunity to accept a creator avoiding the choice until that moment?

or do they live life:

-deciding at a certain time in their past, when they have concluded there is no reasonable evidence to feel the need to choose to follow a religion?

I guess, there are both kinds out there. I can only speak for myself, and I stick to the latter.

Shiann:

Many athiests I know accuse me of being led around by my nose because of my Faith. (Faith being defined as my belief in God does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Not: faith being defined as my religion.)

I try to ask them what they think of making choices completely or mostly on Faith- but many times the conversation has seriously deteriorated by that point. So since this conversation is still intact- what is your position on faith? Is it a real and valid thing? Can we make good decisions based solely on faith? Or is it (as one of my atheist friends say) an idea conjured up by religious leaders to maintain control and herd the followers?

There is a semantic problem with the term “faith”, (as with decision/choice in my OP ). There is religious Faith and there are things which even atheists have to take for granted without proof, e.g. mathematical axioms. If you want to call an “axiom” an act of “faith” - fine. In that sense I have faith in some claims that I take for granted (obvious fits here as well), and yes you can make “good” (I prefer “logically consistent”) decisions upon those. Whether the conclusions are true depends on the validity of the axioms (faith). I guess what you friend refers to, is “blind faith” and that some religious or secular leaders utilize that to manipulate their followers I do no doubt. History proves that; see 9/11, crusades, the holocaust,…

I like the following citation, which I don’t remember exactly and who it was who said this (Swedenborg ?):
“Good people can do good deeds with or without religion, bad people can do bad deeds with or without religion, but it takes religion to have a good man doing bad deeds.”

Atheists tend to confuse faith with religion, because it usualy comes in company.

 

[TOmNossor]

squirt:

And that’s all it is. An exercise. For an atheist, choosing to say “I believe in God” is a lie. An act of hypocrisy.

Oh but what an exercise it is!

There are aspects of the world that Atheist cannot explain.

There are “gaps” in the evolution timeline. The Atheist must also explain to the theist why those theists who have actually experienced God have actually experiences God. To me it seems that the Atheist has plenty of room to doubt the non-existence of God. It also seems that if the Atheist is wrong there is much of a price to pay. Pascal’s wager and all.

So while I do not believe any but the “strong atheist” tumbles to the following question, I still think the “weak atheist” has reason to pause. The question:

Do you have the perfect God detector? With which you have traveled the entire universe? Instantaneously? And still found no God?

Since the answer to the above is no, there is reason to address this question. Perhaps you once had an open mind, but have now closed it around the truth as you see it. This is fine.

But when you suggest this is a act of hypocrisy I say two thing. No, actually it is an act of humility. It is the only way to find the God who is greater than you. He does not manifest himself to those who do not seek him. And, what a wondrous act it is. To walk out into the unknown and seek the seemingly unknowable.

I have often heard atheist suggest that theists are afraid to consider there is no God. No organizer. No helper. No loving Father. No rhyme. No reason. These thoughts do not cause me much fear at all. It is far more amazing and humbling to recognize that there is an infinite and eternal God that is so far greater than me that as I come to know Him I only learn that he is farther beyond me than I ever did suppose. I submit that it is the atheist who fears the smallness of being a child of God and that the theist is truly the brave one.

Charity, TOm

 

[squirt]

TOmNossor:

Since the answer to the above is no, there is reason to address this question. Perhaps you once had an open mind, but have now closed it around the truth as you see it. This is fine.

But when you suggest this is a act of hypocrisy I say two thing. No, actually it is an act of humility. It is the only way to find the God who is greater than you. He does not manifest himself to those who do not seek him. And, what a wondrous act it is. To walk out into the unknown and seek the seemingly unknowable.

Pssst … Tom … I’m a theist. A Catholic one at that.

 

[Shiann]

AnAtheist:

There is a semantic problem with the term “faith”, (as with decision/choice in my OP ). There is religious Faith and there are things which even atheists have to take for granted without proof, e.g. mathematical axioms. If you want to call an “axiom” an act of “faith” - fine. In that sense I have faith in some claims that I take for granted (obvious fits here as well), and yes you can make “good” (I prefer “logically consistent”) decisions upon those. Whether the conclusions are true depends on the validity of the axioms (faith). I guess what you friend refers to, is “blind faith” and that some religious or secular leaders utilize that to manipulate their followers I do no doubt. History proves that; see 9/11, crusades, the holocaust,…

An axiom is something that we could say is ‘self-evident’ like those mathematical formulas you mentioned. The faith I’m speaking of is defined as: belief which does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

True, faith can be mutually exclusive to rational thought. In fact, I would say most faith is.

“Faith is a passionate intuition.”- William Wadsworth

I like the following citation, which I don’t remember exactly and who it was who said this (Swedenborg ?):
“Good people can do good deeds with or without religion, bad people can do bad deeds with or without religion, but it takes religion to have a good man doing bad deeds.”

Atheists tend to confuse faith with religion, because it usualy comes in company.

Faith and religion on the other hand, are not mutually exclusive as you have eluded to here.

So our differences aren’t in religion per se, but in Faith?

 

[Maggie]

AnAtheist:

My point is to clear up some misconceptions people have about atheists or atheism. Ignorance about other people’s motives or beliefs leads to less understanding. I see nothing wrong in trying to understand each other better.

When I first read some posts here, they were filled with misconceptions about atheism, I thought it was time to participate.

And, @kamz: Yes, I enjoy a decent debate.

Okay, so what misconceptions particularly? (take it two or at most three at a time, my brain only handles a few points at a time.) What do you see the perceptions as being, and how do you feel/believe differently.

 

[AnAtheist]

TOmNossor:

There are aspects of the world that Atheist cannot explain.

There are aspects of the world that Atheist cannot explain yet.
Science has answered so many questions which were formerly the sole playground of religion, I do not see why that should stop. Evolution is perhaps not a perfect theory (yet), the big-bang has some open questions (yet), but time will tell. Yes, I have FAITH in scientific progress.

TOmNossor:

Do you have the perfect God detector? With which you have traveled the entire universe? Instantaneously? And still found no God?

No, I haven’t. And neither have you.
Funny notion - turning every stone in the universe in order to find an inscription “Made by God”.
I strongly doubt that anybody around here has searched the entire universe for Odin, so how do you know, he doesn’t exist?
You don’t believe, God lives on another planet, do you? That would make you a Mormon.:bigyikes:

 

[AnAtheist]

Shiann:

An axiom is something that we could say is ‘self-evident’ like those mathematical formulas you mentioned. The faith I’m speaking of is defined as: belief which does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

Wikipedia:

As the word ***axiom*** is understood in modern mathematics, an axiom is **not** a proposition that is self-evident. Rather, it simply means a starting point in a logical system.

…though you are right on the original Greek meaning. An axiom does not (cannot) rest on logical proof or material evidence either, so it is not that afar from faith, isn’t it?

SHiann:

Faith and religion on the other hand, are not mutually exclusive as you have eluded to here.

No, they aren’t. They are just not the same. (Organised) religion without faith is just a club.

SHiann:

So our differences aren't in religion per se, but in Faith?

Hhm, I'd say, our differences are in what we regard as self-evident. ;)

 

[Delgadoajj]

AnAtheist, you wrote:

“In order to choose between alternatives, those alternatives have to exist in the first place.”

This is not true. A child can choose whether to play with their REAL friend, who exists, or their IMAGINARY friend, who does not exist. The child makes a decision, and they already realize that the imaginary friend does not exist. There is no problem with the child realizing that the imaginary friend does not exist, because there are no witnesses to this “imaginary friend”.

This very clearly points out that in order to choose between alternatives, those alternatives not all necessarily have to be in existance (naturally speaking), although they do exist in the supernatural.

As long as there are witnesses :bowdown: to the Truth (God) around the person who comes to the realization that there is no God, that person is making a clear choice that God does not exist (whether they admit it or not. In this case, there is a problem, because we have had witnesses to the Truth, beginning with Abraham: “By faith he that is called Abraham obeyed to go out into a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing whither he went” (HB 11, 8). Also: “Faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things that appear not” (HB 11, 1).

Also, the Catechism says: “To obey in the faith, is to submit one’s self freely to the word, because its truth is guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself. From this obedience, Abraham is the model that the Sacred Scripture proposes. The Virgin Mary is the most perfect realization of the same.” (#144). :tiphat:

In Christ,

Jorge.

 

[Shiann]

anathiest:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiann
Faith and religion on the other hand, are not mutually exclusive as you have eluded to here.

No, they aren’t. They are just not the same. (Organised) religion without faith is just a club.

I am agreeing with you. Faith and religion are necessary partners and are not mutually exclusive. When speaking about religion one MUST have faith. Faith without a direction is useless (might even be philisophically impossible). And religion without faith is just a club as you have said.
AnAthiest:

I’d say, our differences are in what we regard as self-evident.

I’d say my being a (and staying a) theist has little or nothing to do with ‘evidence’ and more to do with Faith.

Either way, thanks for a good discussion. I look forward to reading your posts on this other topics :tiphat:

 

[TOmNossor]

AnAtheist:
I strongly doubt that anybody around here has searched the entire universe for Odin, so how do you know, he doesn’t exist?

Many Christians have a good answer to this. We have found the ONE true God. Through communication with Him we know that Odin is not some other God we must find. We know not to search by appealing to a higher authority that we trust.

AnAtheist:
You don’t believe, God lives on another planet, do you? That would make you a Mormon.

This was actually funny. I reckon!

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

squirt:

Pssst … Tom … I’m a theist. A Catholic one at that.

Charity, TOm