The Root of Atheism

[Kaninchen]

I mean also that protestans have flaws on their doctrine, for example evolutionism dosent contradict the genesis , like John Paul the second said “truth dosent contradicts the truth”.
dosent amtter if evolusionism happened or not. however people use that to debunk christianity.

The bible is a spitirual book and not a scientific book. the scientific stuffs dosent matter just the spiritual stuffs are the ones that matter.

for example would you look for religious stuffs on a math book?
no, its a math book it explain stuffs about math. It is the same with the bible, it is a spiritual book and not a scientific book.

So many protestans say the bible is the main authority so they read the genesis as if it was a scientific book or if the entire bible was an historic book. and this gives a bad image as well to the religions, people suddenly start to think that inspired book are fairy tales.

That all might work if the thread were about ‘atheism in America’ but atheism is much less evident in America than it is in Europe. In America the incidence of atheism is relatively low but fundamentalist protestantism is common - in Europe, atheism is common but fundamentalist protestantism is rare.

Creationism is an American problem not a European problem.

 

[jimmy85]

That all might work if the thread were about ‘atheism in America’ but atheism is much less evident in America than it is in Europe. In America the incidence of atheism is relatively low but fundamentalist protestantism is common - in Europe, atheism is common but fundamentalist protestantism is rare.

Creationism is an American problem not a European problem.

well I dunno actually but there is a huge diffrent in spain and italy in comparison with the netherlands,scandinavia north germany etc
For example the most important countrys that were calvinist were the neherlands,scotland, n soem in switzerland.Calvin started to teach about predestiantion he taugh that some people were born to go to hell and some to go to heaven. this kind of mistakes made peopel to fear n to quit his churches. I think those kind of mistakes made by protestans are the reason why most of north europe is atheist.

social problems have also a huge part in the problem and also the europeans have an agnostic-atheist culture.
all thos humanist and atheists stuffs started in europe: marx, Nietzsche Rousseau , Voltaire etc.

 

[Smber2c]

That all might work if the thread were about ‘atheism in America’ but atheism is much less evident in America than it is in Europe. In America the incidence of atheism is relatively low but fundamentalist protestantism is common - in Europe, atheism is common but fundamentalist protestantism is rare.

Creationism is an American problem not a European problem.

That is probably true, but I’m under the impression that most people here are from America…thus most of what people here would have to offer would be an American perspecitive on the Roots of Athiesm.
I would also heavily emphasise the word ***relatively ***in your line, “In America the incidence of atheism is ***relatively ***low”, because having been at 4 different colleges, there were many of them at every school - a good number of them as professors.

 

[Magicsilence]

I can’t agree with that, when it comes to things like this people will always believe what they they want (not just what is immediately appealing though). Yes Christians sacrifice immediate gratification (sin) for their beliefs, but you could say that the psychological benefits of such belief (a meaning to life, relatives awaiting them in heaven) more than makes up for it.

Blessings,

We act in accordance to our beliefs.

We do not forego sin for heaven, though doing so is a direct consequence of our lives in Christ. We recognise the Truth, and react to it. (Just as you would react to your hand in a cup of boiling water). It is not an easy decision to be a Christian, as if the taking on of a set of beliefs can be done for any psychological benefit. I will agree however, that life in Christ is much nicer than wallowing in sin, despite the hardships.

Any man who subscribes to a political line because of promised benefits that will never materialise is a fool. How much more so with regard to faith?

Christianity is not about perceived benefits, like a diet or fitness regime. It is about reacting to Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Peace and God Bless!

 

[Kaninchen]

well I dunno actually but there is a huge diffrent in spain and italy in comparison with the netherlands,scandinavia north germany etc

Growingly less so - mind you there are Italians who believe Milan to be closer to Stockholm than it is to Rome (you probably have to know Italy to really understand that).

For example the most important countrys that were calvinist were the neherlands,scotland, n soem in switzerland.Calvin started to teach about predestiantion he taugh that some people were born to go to hell and some to go to heaven. this kind of mistakes made peopel to fear n to quit his churches. I think those kind of mistakes made by protestans are the reason why most of north europe is atheist.

The Netherlands, Scotland and Switzerland are tiny in the context of Europe - it’s like talking about Massachusetts, South Dakota and Alabama while ignoring New York, Texas and California.

social problems have also a huge part in the problem and also the europeans have an agnostic-atheist culture.
all thos humanist and atheists stuffs started in europe: marx, Nietzsche Rousseau , Voltaire etc.

Only one of whom had a protestant background.

 

[Kaninchen]

That is probably true, but I’m under the impression that most people here are from America…thus most of what people here would have to offer would be an American perspecitive on the Roots of Athiesm.

I appreciate that but a European context had been raised.

I would also heavily emphasise the word ***relatively ***in your line, “In America the incidence of atheism is ***relatively ***low”, because having been at 4 different colleges, there were many of them at every school - a good number of them as professors.

As a European who lived for a number of years in parts of the US not best known for religious fervor, I’d suggest that even the less religious parts of the US seem hotbeds of religious fanaticism in comparison with most of Western Europe. Unlike the US, the question of whether somebody is an atheist or not is all a bit of a yawn - atheists don’t exactly have to congregate around college/university towns!

 

[jimmy85]

Growingly less so - mind you there are Italians who believe Milan to be closer to Stockholm than it is to Rome (you probably have to know Italy to really understand that).

The Netherlands, Scotland and Switzerland are tiny in the context of Europe - it’s like talking about Massachusetts, South Dakota and Alabama while ignoring New York, Texas and California.

Only one of whom had a protestant background.

well forget italy what about Spain, Poland, south Germany, switzerland, ireland n the catholic slavic coutrnys well i think i meantioned every catholic country after the reform they still have something of their religion.
after the revolution in france they slaughtered most of priest in france and they separated the church from the state . So is normal that france is becoming atheist.

on teh otehr hand we have scandinavia north germany , the netherlands , UK , n every country in north europe with high levels of atheism.

and I mentioned marx, Nietzsche Rousseau , Voltaire as another separated reason of atheism.

 

[Smber2c]

As a European who lived for a number of years in parts of the US not best known for religious fervor, I’d suggest that even the less religious parts of the US seem hotbeds of religious fanaticism in comparison with most of Western Europe. Unlike the US, the question of whether somebody is an atheist or not is all a bit of a yawn - atheists don’t exactly have to congregate around college/university towns!

That’s certainly fair. I’m more thinking that ideally the “low level” of Atheism woud revert to “no level” of atheism.

I’m all for freedom of religion, but it would be awesome of we all used that freedom and chose Catholicism.

 

[mlchance]

Two roots: ignorance of what is actually being rejected and arrogance about the conclusions arrived at via this ignorance.

Look around and read the posts and books. There isn’t a single atheist out there who actually rejects authentic Christian (read: Catholic) doctrine. Every single atheist rejects the strawman of a distorted Christianity while at the same time at least implying that people who don’t are at least self-deluded.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Benedictus]

Two roots: ignorance of what is actually being rejected and arrogance about the conclusions arrived at via this ignorance.

Look around and read the posts and books. There isn’t a single atheist out there who actually rejects authentic Christian (read: Catholic) doctrine. Every single atheist rejects the strawman of a distorted Christianity while at the same time at least implying that people who don’t are at least self-deluded.

(disclaimer: I’m agnostic, not an atheist)

Atheists don’t reject Christianity so much as they reject the idea that there is a God. There is no “evidence” (for the lack of a better word) that God exists. Further, there has never been an argument for belief in God that didn’t have at least one glaring flaw.

In my own case, I was once a very observant, orthodox Catholic. I do know the Church’s teachings. I’ve read the Catechism and Bible from cover to cover; I’ve read (orthodox) books on Catholic theology and philosophy, and I’ve read Aquinas, Augustine, Chrysostom, et al. I’ve also read most of the well-known spiritual writers. I went to daily Mass. I believed in and truly “loved” God. Then, I began wondering if God wasn’t just my imaginary friend…

After years of prayer, study, and reflection, I came to realize that there was no compelling reason to believe in God. Whether or not there is a god of some sort remains unknown and is most likely unknowable. Perhaps there is some impersonal God like the God of Einstein or Spinoza. In any case, the question of God is largely academic, and there is no reason to expend time and resources serving a being who may or may no exist and has no apparent interest in revealing himself.

In summary, I don’t think I’m ignorant of the Christianity I can no longer accept. I think I can safely say that I understand the Church’s teachings better than many people in the pews on Sunday.

 

[Mirdath]

In summary, I don’t think I’m ignorant of the Christianity I can no longer accept. I think I can safely say that I understand the Church’s teachings better than many people in the pews on Sunday.

I’m with you – only difference is I don’t think I’ve read Chrysostom specifically

 

[jimmy85]

(disclaimer: I’m agnostic, not an atheist)

Atheists don’t reject Christianity so much as they reject the idea that there is a God. There is no “evidence” (for the lack of a better word) that God exists. Further, there has never been an argument for belief in God that didn’t have at least one glaring flaw.

In my own case, I was once a very observant, orthodox Catholic. I do know the Church’s teachings. I’ve read the Catechism and Bible from cover to cover; I’ve read (orthodox) books on Catholic theology and philosophy, and I’ve read Aquinas, Augustine, Chrysostom, et al. I’ve also read most of the well-known spiritual writers. I went to daily Mass. I believed in and truly “loved” God. Then, I began wondering if God wasn’t just my imaginary friend…

After years of prayer, study, and reflection, I came to realize that there was no compelling reason to believe in God. Whether or not there is a god of some sort remains unknown and is most likely unknowable. Perhaps there is some impersonal God like the God of Einstein or Spinoza. In any case, the question of God is largely academic, and there is no reason to expend time and resources serving a being who may or may no exist and has no apparent interest in revealing himself.

In summary, I don’t think I’m ignorant of the Christianity I can no longer accept. I think I can safely say that I understand the Church’s teachings better than many people in the pews on Sunday.

Thanks to share that, well I think God dosent reveal hismelf like that. st Clement of Alexandria said that reason wasent enough to find God we also needed two more virtudes the control of our liberty in order to be moraly good persons and the love.

In my case God revealed himself so much that I cant denied it. I have ahd several spiritual experiences that i cant explain nor denied, an I am naturaly a skeptic person, I always need a reason for everything in order to believe.

So God dosent reveal hismelf because he want us to have faith and that is soemthign difficult to attain.

Nevertheless when you read the bible and study theology in a humble way realizing that Love is waht move this world. we all are created because of Love and that God himslef expresed his love to the extreme it make sense for me.

when you read for exampel the gospel and you find out that Jesus was very poor taht even he was born on the palces were the farm animals ate. that tells me that God himslef wanted to be humiliated and poor to teh extreme jsut to give a reason to exist for all the people that are humilated and poor in the entire world.
he expresed his love is a unselfish way while teaching us the good path on life and giving everything for us.

when u read the OT as well u see how many times God didnt quited to help the israelite dosent matter their sins they jstu ahd to repent and still if we repent he wont denied us his forgiveness adn he taught them as a father helpign them n correcting them when they did soemthing wrong in order that we could have this religion right now.

when you think about a God that he went so humiliated even to remain in the consacrated host, I realize that there is a reason why to carry on.

So he have interest in revealing himself but not thtourgh the knwoledge not trhought wisdom but through love.

besides there is soemthign you missed, is that all this awfull stuffs that happen all this tests of faith and dificult moment are rewarded by him. so that is what faith is all about, to believe that God is there close to us n that he love us no matter what, it is the answer n the reason to life, to pain and to everything as well.

I think that went you read the bible and all this stuffs you ahve to remeber that God has a extreme respect for the free will of people. and he dotn want to be a dictator or soemone that force people to love him. So he dosent reveal himself because he respect that liberty as well.

catholicismandbibletheology.blog.com/

 

[dylanschrader]

(disclaimer: I’m agnostic, not an atheist)

Atheists don’t reject Christianity so much as they reject the idea that there is a God. There is no “evidence” (for the lack of a better word) that God exists. Further, there has never been an argument for belief in God that didn’t have at least one glaring flaw.

In my own case, I was once a very observant, orthodox Catholic. I do know the Church’s teachings. I’ve read the Catechism and Bible from cover to cover; I’ve read (orthodox) books on Catholic theology and philosophy, and I’ve read Aquinas, Augustine, Chrysostom, et al. I’ve also read most of the well-known spiritual writers. I went to daily Mass. I believed in and truly “loved” God. Then, I began wondering if God wasn’t just my imaginary friend…

After years of prayer, study, and reflection, I came to realize that there was no compelling reason to believe in God. Whether or not there is a god of some sort remains unknown and is most likely unknowable. Perhaps there is some impersonal God like the God of Einstein or Spinoza. In any case, the question of God is largely academic, and there is no reason to expend time and resources serving a being who may or may no exist and has no apparent interest in revealing himself.

That’s the real tragedy in what you’re writing here.

But, it’s a very important thing that you recognize that our human desires by nature are frustrated without a revelation from God, that man can never be happy serving a God he does not know, can never fully love a God who has not revealed himself to man.

In summary, I don’t think I’m ignorant of the Christianity I can no longer accept. I think I can safely say that I understand the Church’s teachings better than many people in the pews on Sunday.

It sounds like you are very well-versed philosophically and especially in the doctrines of the Catholic Church.

Since there must be some necessary being, something not contingent on which everything else is contingent, then if that being is personal, why would he freely choose to create anything?

He could not create anything out of necessity since by definition he is self-sufficient.

Therefore, the only reason that he could create anything contingent on him would be purely for the sake of the thing created by him.

Since man has intellect and will and is clearly contingent, God must have created him for his own sake. The good of man is also to be found in God alone as can be seen by the nature of the human intellect and will (we will not be happy until we know the truth and love the greatest good).

Since man does not have an immediate and intuitive knowledge of God by nature, why would God create man, whose good is God himself, without revealing himself to man?

My point is, man existing as he does, either God has the ability to reveal himself and did/does reveal himself in the way which is the greatest good for man or there is no God. It doesn’t seem reasonable to believe that there could be a personal God, given what we know of human nature, who would not reveal himself.

 

[Mirdath]

But, it’s a very important thing that you recognize that our human desires by nature are frustrated without a revelation from God, that man can never be happy serving a God he does not know, can never fully love a God who has not revealed himself to man.

That’s kind of the point – one of them, anyway.

Since there must be some necessary being, something not contingent on which everything else is contingent, then if that being is personal, why would he freely choose to create anything?

This is just the argument from first cause.

Since man does not have an immediate and intuitive knowledge of God by nature, why would God create man, whose good is God himself, without revealing himself to man?

If I accept your argument (which, for the record, I do not) I have three answers for that question just off the top of my head. The first is that God considers our good, lesser though it may be, is at its best shining for itself and not drowned out. There’s a time for halogen bulbs and a time for candlelight.

The second is actually rather Catholic in nature: if God revealed himself beyond a doubt, free will is thoroughly abrogated. People would have no choice but to believe.

The third is that God’s a consummate practical joker and possesses, among his other goods, a great sense of humor.

My point is, man existing as he does, either God has the ability to reveal himself and did/does reveal himself in the way which is the greatest good for man or there is no God. It doesn’t seem reasonable to believe that there could be a personal God, given what we know of human nature, who would not reveal himself.

I do not know what Benedictus thinks, but in my opinion, if there is such a thing as a God it is not likely to be very personal, necessarily omnibenevolent, or even at all recognizable as something in whose image we may have been molded.

 

[Ma.Eugenia]

What is the REAL ROOT of atheism?..
…Thoughts? and thanks for sharing

I think a lot of people start on the road to atheism when they start seeing that what they want to do does not conform to the rules set by God through His Church.

They start trying to prove that the Church is wrong and that God does not exist to prove themselves right. Rather than seeing all the evidence around us that God does exist, they become deliberately blind to this else they prove themselves wrong.

Sometimes those that say that they are atheist actually are people who want to do things that are not acceptable (sometimes considered immoral) by the church and they don’t want to be constricted by any rules. They want freedom from any restrictions from authority of the Church.

 

[Benedictus]

I think a lot of people start on the road to atheism when they start seeing that what they want to do does not conform to the rules set by God through His Church.

I would say that some people decide that they don’t want to follow seemingly arbitrary rules set by people who claim to be God’s messenger, vicar, etc. or at least know God’s will. These people start thinking about religion and wonder how on earth someone can claim to know God’s will but not be able to show that God actually exists. I doubt that many people who really believe that Christianity is true would reject it just because they wanted to do something the Christians say is wrong.

I know that when I was a devout, orthodox Catholic, I liked to think that atheists just wanted to live by their own rules, but I’ve found that not to be true in general. Generally speaking, people don’t reject Christianity because they don’t like Christian morals; instead, they reject Christian morals because they don’t accept Christianity. There are exceptions, however.

Frankly, I view the argument that atheists reject God because they want to live by their own rules as a subtle way of saying that atheists are bad people. Intentional or not, it’s really a cleverly disguised ad hominem.

 

[Nick]

I thought that this blog gives some good ideas that are relevant to this thread since most atheists/agnostics use evolution as a main argument for the rationality of atheism/agnosticism.

jkjonesthinks.blogspot.com/2007/05/richard-dawkins-2.html

You can post comments, and I assume ask questions, near the bottom of the page if you are looking for further clarification.

 

[JeannetteCML]

When I think of the root of atheism, I first think of what prevents me from becoming an atheist myself. I am not an atheist because I believe that because of the way humans are uniquely conscious beings, it is too incredible that they must become totally extinguished by death. I believe that the dignity of the human person is so great that it must be given the opportunity for eternal life. I also believe in ultimate justice.

One might say these views of mine stem from some kind of instint for survival. But I think they transcend what has been given to us by natural evolution. We have become spiritual beings now. Images of God.

So I think the roots of athiesm are not pride so much but a kind of despair that there can be an all-loving God, that there can be ultimate justice, that there can be life and much more meaning beyond the grave. It’s a lack of hope (if not a lack of imagination!)

 

[Ma.Eugenia]

So I think the roots of athiesm are not pride so much but a kind of despair that there can be an all-loving God, that there can be ultimate justice, that there can be life and much more meaning beyond the grave. It’s a lack of hope (if not a lack of imagination!)

I agree with you.

 

[Ma.Eugenia]

I know that when I was a devout, orthodox Catholic, I liked to think that atheists just wanted to live by their own rules, but I’ve found that not to be true in general. Generally speaking, people don’t reject Christianity because they don’t like Christian morals; instead, they reject Christian morals because they don’t accept Christianity. There are exceptions, however.

Whether atheists rejected Christianity first before Christian morals or vice versa is debatable.

So far, in the atheists that I’ve met, the rejection of Christian morals came first before their rejection of Christianity. I see it more as a rule rather than an exception.

You may be in that “exception” category, Benedictus.

Frankly, I view the argument that atheists reject God because they want to live by their own rules as a subtle way of saying that atheists are bad people. Intentional or not, it’s really a cleverly disguised ad hominem.

There is a saying “love the sinner, hate the sin”.

I believe that rejecting God, who is All Good…can only be bad.

It is the action of rejecting God (and all the consequences/ thoughts/ beliefs/ actions that flows from that rejection) that I say is wrong.

Everyone has the potential to do good–even the atheist.

But this does not negate the fact that in rejecting God, you are rejecting the One who is All Good and all that He stands for.