Most atheists do, yes. All the evidence we have indicates that consciousness is tied to brain activity; when brain activity stops, it is very, very likely that consciousness will end as well.So, Atheists do view death, much like - turning a switch off.
Well, if it is true that this is the one and only life we will ever have, then there is a great deal of motivation for working together with others to build the best possible life that we can in the here and now. Furthermore, there is a great motivation for improving this life – if not only for ourselves, then for the generations that will follow us. I certainly would like my descendents to live the one and only life they’ll ever have in a good environment.Where then, is the motivation to behave in life?
No. There is no connection between rejecting the claim that supernatural beings exist and being a self-centered person.Doesn’t this view create a self-centeredness?
Oh, I totally agree. But that has nothing to do with Heaven and Hell and that people cannot behave, if there were no such places or no belief in them.Do not assume that what works for you, works for everybody else, because everybody is different. However, it is commonly known and accepted that most people do respond to positive and negative reinforcement.
Your thoughts?
Apart from all that time sitting in church when I could be doing something useful.Atheist,
Many of you have made some good points here. I think that most of you would make a good Christians/Catholics. What do you have you lose be accepting Christian truths, the answer is, nothing, you have nothing to lose.
On the other hand, if Christianity does represent the truth….then as an Atheist, you are in a dangerous predicament, where you may fine out that Hell is a real place and that Hell is where people go, who reject God.
No, atheism is just not believing in any kind of divine being. If that is “sin” equivalent to murder… well, that says more about “God” than it says about me.Atheism is the rejection of God the father, God the Son- Jesus Christ and God the Holy Spirit. Rejection of God; the Holy Trinity, is a mortal sin. As far as sins go, it ranks right up there with murder…if not worse… same penalty.
Think about all those Serial Killers, who where unassuming and thought to be “nice” and polite by the people around them. However, when the day came, when they were finally caught and arrested, there neighbors and co-workers respond by saying something like, “He seemed like a nice guy, I would have never expected the he would do something like that”.
Why not be a Muslim? Or a Hindu? Or a Buddhist? It seems there are good and bad people in all cross sections of society. Being religious seems neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for being good.If you are making the effort to be good, then why not be a Christian, because all goodness emanates from God?
Since you have already decided this is true, I doubt that there is anything I can say that will change your mind. Perhaps I could just ask you to re-read the comments posted by non-believers in answer to your thread a bit more carefully?I made a comment here earlier, where I said that Atheism creates self-centeredness and of course, an Atheist here immediately rejected that notion. However, it is true, Atheists are self-centered because they want there actions to create a positive result or pay-off, where they benefit; “it’s all about me” or, “what will I get out of it?” How is that not self-centeredness?
I don’t actually think being smart has anything to do with it. There are smart atheists and there are stupid atheists, just as there are smart religious folk and stupid religious folk. Yes, I have weighed up my own experiences with religion and belief, tried to think objectively about the tenets of Christianity and other religions, and come to the conclusion, that, of all the hundreds of different ideas that different people have had about God and gods through the ages, probably none of them are actually right. Is it arrogant or boastful of me to just come out and say this? Strange, isn’t it, that religious folk don’t get to be intolerant extremists until they’ve actually killed or injured someone, yet atheists can be intolerant extremists simply by opening their mouths…Here is another example; An Atheist speaking - “Because I am so smart and I have figured it all out, on my own, I think that vast majority of all those who have ever lived, including those highly educated persons who believed in God, were all wrong and I’m right, because I’m smarter than all those people who have ever lived and who had a belief in God.”
Of course, it’s just completely inconceivable that someone might have no religion.Now, for a general comment and this is my own opinion; From debating with Atheists here at CAF, I have come away with impression that for the most part, many of them are pretty impressed with themselves and with their own intellect….they are basically, a member of a their own religion, a religion one…a religion of their on intellect. What I see lacking in Atheism is true humility and the ability to surrender to something larger than yourself.
Whether we have anything to lose is irrelevant. Most atheists lack faith in any gods because there is no evidence for the existence of any god.Most of you [atheists] have made several good points here, in your posts. I think that many of you would make a good Christians/Catholics. What do you have you lose be accepting Christian truths, the answer is, nothing, you have nothing to lose.
It doesn’t matter if a belief is comforting or “wouldn’t hurt” – what matters is whether it’s true or not, whether it can be justified by evidence. Most people can’t “make” themselves believe a claim that has no evidence to support it.
For example, someone might say, “it wouldn’t hurt you to belive in aliens that visit the earth and make contact with some people.” And you’re right, it wouldn’t hurt. In fact, believing that claim might even make life more interesting and exciting. But the plain fact of the matter is that I can’t bring myself to believe in such a silly claim because there is no evidence for it (other than a couple of anecdotes, which is not evidence for such a claim).
It’s the same with religion. It might make life more fun and exciting to believe in a god – to some people, anyway – but there’s no evidence that any gods at all exist.
I disagree with several of his ideas, but chief among them is the idea that a supernatural god exists.What, specifically, is it that Jesus taught the you have a disagreement with?
It’s not just the Christian god that I do not believe in, mind you. I also lack faith in the Muslim god, in the Hindu gods, the Roman gods, the Norse gods, etc.
There is no evidence for the existence of any of those beings.
Well, we need to define our terms here clearly. When I responded to your post, I assumed that by “self-centered,” you meant something like, “Caring only about the self and being totally unconcerned with others,” the standard meaning that most people attach to word “self-centered.”I made a comment here earlier, where I said that Atheism creates self-centeredness and of course, an Atheist here immediately rejected that notion. However, it is true, Atheists are self-centered because they want there actions to create a positive result or pay-off, where they benefit; “it’s all about me” or, “what will I get out of it?” How is that not self-centeredness?
Here, you seem to be defining “self-centered” as “want[ing] [one’s own] actions to create a positive result or pay-off, where they benefit.” Under this definition, nearly all people on earth (whether religious or not) would qualify as “self-centered.” You said yourself earlier that people are motivated by things like rewards and punishments, such as being hired for a job, playing on a football team, earning an Olympic gold medal, and even, in the case of the religious, earning whatever afterlife reward they believe in. So you agree that most people, whether religious or not, are motivated by a desire to “create a positive result or pay-off, where they benefit.”
It’s perfectly possible to be “self-centered” under that second definition (which almost all people are) and yet not be at all self-centered under the first definition. For example, an atheist friend of mine tutors a child at a local library each week. She does this for a lot of reasons, mostly because her action creates “positive results,” both for herself and the child, who is a fellow human in this one and only life that we have. It makes my friend feel good that she’s giving back to the community, it helps to create a better world (in which my friend lives), and there’s an element of fun and enjoyment in it as well. Clearly, this is “self-centered” under the second definition. However, my friend is obviously not thinking only of herself here – she’s very much focused on the child that she helps, she goes through a lot of effort to offer a service to someone, and she’s motivated by a desire to improve the community for everyone, not just herself. Clearly, my friend is not at all “self-centered” under the first definition.
Atheism is unconnected to both kinds of self-centeredness because atheism is nothing more than the rejection of the claim that there are gods.
As humanity learns more, we do actually become capable of realizing where previous generations were wrong – it’s not that we’re “smarter,” necessarily; it’s that we have more evidence at our disposal. We have a big advantage over previous generations, just as future generations will have a big advantage over us.Here is another example; An Atheist speaking - “Because I am so smart and I have figured it all out, on my own, I think that vast majority of all those who have ever lived, including those highly educated persons who believed in God, were all wrong and I’m right, because I’m smarter than all those people who have ever lived and who had a belief in God.”
For example, many highly educated people of the ancient world believed that the earth was flat or that the sun went around the earth; many educated people, right up until the last century, didn’t know that the universe is expanding.
We’re not necessarily “smarter” than those people – we just have access to more knowledge than they did.
That depends heavily on the god. There are a great many gods in this world, i.e. thought by men, I can gladly have in my life. Thor, Venus, Vidar, … No, this is no joke, it is about the concept that stands behinds those gods, and it is not about believing in them but to honour what they represent. The concept behind the Christian God is simply illogical, unsound, and I dare say impossible. Agreed there are aspects that I could honour but then there are other I can’t, mainly due to that fact that this god is supposed to encompass virtually everything.Having God in your life wouldn’t hurt…
Oh, many things. First off “love thy enemy” and “if someone strikes you on the cheek, turn to him the other”, that is so utterly stupid that even the Christians don’t do it. Then he has distorted sense of justice, e.g. punishing things for the way he (as God) has created them (Mk 11,13f). This “who is not with me is against me”-attitude, that phrase was used by George W. Bush, Joseph Goebbels, and Darth Vader too. Then he turns old testament crimes into thought crimes.What, specifically, is it that Jesus taught the you have a disagreement with?
Let me cite the Iliad, a short conversation between Apollon and Achilles:What I see lacking in Atheism is true humility and the ability to surrender to something larger than yourself.
Then unto the son of Peleus spake Phoebus Apollo: “Wherefore, son of Peleus, dost thou pursue me with swift feet, thyself a mortal, while I am an immortal god? Not even yet hast thou known me that I am a god, but thou ragest incessantly! Hast thou in good sooth no care for thy toil regarding the Trojans whom thou dravest in rout, who now are gathered into the city, while thou hast turned thee aside hitherward? Thou shalt never slay me, for lo, I am not one that is appointed to die.” Then with a mighty burst of anger spake to him swift-footed Achilles: “Thou hast foiled me, thou god that workest afar, most cruel of all gods in that thou hast now turned me hither from the wall; else had many a man yet bitten the ground or ever they came into Ilios. Now hast thou robbed me of great glory, aud them hast thou saved full easily, seeing thou hadst no fear of vengeance in the aftertime. Verily I would avenge me on thee, had I but the power.”
The Church teaches faith and works. Therefore, in order to have faith in Christ one MUST believe in Him first, yes?I disagree with your interpretation, yes. Here is what the Church teaches (the Catechism):
1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven–through a purification or immediately–or immediate and everlasting damnation. At the evening of life, we shall be judged on our love.
Nice post and appreciate and I agree with most of it…Alright, ladies and gentlemen, I’m going to stick my neck into it.
We are told that we must accept certain truths to be Christians, one of which is that God exists, another which is that He loves us, a third still, that His Son died for our sins. We are given a promise that salvation is through the Church. We sacramentally enter that promise (that new Covenant) through baptism, reconciliation and confirmation. If you don’t believe that, you aren’t Catholic.
This is faith. But we must recognize that one never presented in their life with such a promise (and the lifelong commitment it entails) is not responsible for not playing along in a game they weren’t aware of. So we have the concept of invincible ignorance. But like the souls in Dante’s Limbo, there is still the question of where the dice will fall. Will a person choose God? We don’t know. Free will exists, and every man, given knowledge, is capable of willing imprudently. And invincible ignorance is not a “get out of morality free” card, even for those who legitimately have it, because bad habits can make bad people; before Christ came, man was able to sin, the Jews because they had the Divine Law, and the Gentiles against the law written upon their hearts. Likewise, the invincibly ignorant can sin, the punishment of sin is itself sin, and the wages of sin, naturally and supernaturally, is death.
So it should be made VERY UNDENIABLY clear that baptism of desire, the one way through which those not baptized in water may be saved (and which itself is not entirely worked out doctrinally, but which is entirely dependent on God, the untamed lion, so no banking on circumstance) is NOT something we may say is for the most part. It may be given to most, or to none, or maybe even to only one. We haven’t a clue, frankly. But we do have hope in the knowledge that God loves us and wants us to be with Him. Period.
Practical recap: Atheists, you might get lucky, but we have no idea, so if you’re banking on luck, it’s a really bad idea, and you should get yourself a right proper baptizin’.
If anything I have said is imprudent or incorrect, I humbly submit to the Magisterium of the Church.
For me, personally, my rejection of those concepts is indeed willful.For most Atheists’, capable of responding in this forum, I believe that their rejection of God the Father, His Son, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, is willful and with their full knowledge.
Well, since you say below that you don’t associate with atheists, your claim here needs to be taken with more than a few grains of salt. Speaking as someone who knows a fair number of atheists, I can say that the atheists I know are as relatively “normal” as the believers I know.In addition, my experience has been that most people think that Atheists’ are a little odd and there is usually something else weird, going on in their lives, other than Atheism.
So you keep saying. You seem to have missed the post where I not only deny that point, I supply evidence that demonstrates that you are wrong – like, for example, atheists I know who give selflessly of their time to help others.Atheism is the most self-center, arrogant, conceded, “it all about me and what I think”, evil, because it go against God; movement there is.
Again, no atheist thinks he is “smarter than God” – atheists don’t think that God – any god – is real, so it’s impossible to be “smarter” than a fictional character.After all, these are people, who claim to be “smarter” than God is and “smarter” than everybody who has ever believed in God….Self-Centered…Yep!
Well, you’ve certainly done a good job avoiding my posts, as you do not address anything I’ve said and continue to repeat falsehoods.For the most part, I try to avoid Atheists.
Just out of curiosity, how many Atheists here, are there, who are routinely involved in and behavior, or in a lifestyle, or have beliefs that conflict with the teachings of the Catholic Church?
A large number of atheists are skeptics, so you won’t often find them subscribing to other kinds of supernatural claims.How many Atheist here, are involved in Witchcraft, Astrology, Psychics, Goth or Emmo or Satanic rituals and so on…? Just wondering
Interestingly, the notion of a delayed reward or punishment is a very poor shaper of immediate behavior. It isn’t likely that the notion of heaven or hell motivates many people in most of their behavior given the failure of other types of delayed rewards and delayed punishment to alter behavior for most people. There are some people who are motivated in some ways, or nobody would finish school or pay off a debt.Oh, I totally agree. But that has nothing to do with Heaven and Hell and that people cannot behave, if there were no such places or no belief in them.
I tend to agree that many, even most people will behave better under the threat of eternal punishment and prospect of eternal reward, but that does not make the real existence of such punishment and reward in any way more likely.