Why do some people prefer to be atheists?

[tonyrey]

I think the business of what constants and how many and how difficult they are to narrow down is not going to influence whether someone believes or does not believe in God.

Atheism cannot logically prosper on just that business of constants, and I’m afraid there isn’t any logic that can actually prove the negative about God. If anything, there a great deal of logic in the sense of signs pointing to a deity, without actually showing us the deity.

Almost everyone acknowledges the hiddenness of God, and that fact is used by atheists to argue that God is hidden not because he hides, but because he does not exist.

I would think that God is doing us a favor by staying hidden as much as possible from our intellects, because he wants to reside not in our heads but in our hearts. That takes getting to know and love God, as a person, rather than as a mental construct. More than anything else, it requires getting to be open to receiving God in our hearts, not resisting him with all our intellectual might.

“our intellectual might” are the key words. It needs an immense stretch of the imagination to believe our insight into the nature of the universe has emerged accidentally from purposeless, mindless molecules. To attribute such incredible power to matter requires a far greater act of faith than belief in a Supreme Mind because it violates not only the principle of adequacy but also economy, coherence, consistency and fertility…

 

[tonyrey]

It’s not that I don’t believe in God as much as I don’t see how such an entity is necessary.

Is anything necessary?

It seems your ultimate explanation is **physical **necessity despite your reliance on intangible thought to arrive at all your conclusions. You kick away the ladder which enables you to have a panoramic view of reality! To derive everything from nothing is slightly less preposterous because it doesn’t require a preconceived conclusion that matter is more powerful than the mind…

 

[Solmyr]

It needs an immense stretch of the imagination to believe our insight into the nature of the universe has emerged accidentally from purposeless, mindless molecules.

Only for you. Observe the Galton board, where purposeless, mindless little balls will form a beautiful Gauss distribution. There is no need to assume any “ordering agent”. Probability theory can answer such questions easily.

The so-called Monte-Carlo methods can be used to calculate the value of PI to any precision, for example by using the following experiment.

Take a large billiard table, and draw equidistant lines on it. Take a needle, the length of which equals to the distance between the lines. Spin and drop the needle a few trillion times on the board, and count how many times did the needle intersect one of the lines. Multiply the number of drops by two, and divide it by the number of intersections. Whoa! The number we get is a very precise approximation of PI. Of course a computer simulation will be faster than actually dropping the needle a few trillion times.

The power of random events is not to be underestimated. The trillions of air molecules, which move randomly in a closed container, will “magically” exert the same pressure on the walls of the container. They move “mindlessly” and “purposelessly” around, but the final result is uniform pressure. There is no need for a “pressurizing” genie.

 

[Maximus_Power]

Why do some people prefer to be atheists?

It’s easy. Your purpose becomes yourself.

In 200 years nobody will remember me, whats the difference between not being remembered or and not existing at all? If all is nothing and there is no God, Heaven or Hell. I’d get off this computer get on the next plane to Las Vegas, spend my entire bank account on pleasure and off myself at the end of the cash flow, because whats the difference?

 

[tonyrey]

It needs an immense stretch of the imagination to believe our insight into the nature of the universe has emerged accidentally

It is sheer fantasy to claim that a **purposeless **distribution of **purposeless **objects is comparable to a person’s **insight **and control of events.Where is the evidence that **mindless **arrangements of molecules have ever created a rational being?

 

[Bradski]

Why do some people prefer to be atheists?

It’s easy. Your purpose becomes yourself.

In 200 years nobody will remember me, whats the difference between not being remembered or and not existing at all? If all is nothing and there is no God, Heaven or Hell. I’d get off this computer get on the next plane to Las Vegas, spend my entire bank account on pleasure and off myself at the end of the cash flow, because whats the difference?

I hope to hell you don’t lose your faith.

And what’s with the statement about not being remembered in 200 years? Do you remember anyone from 1815? We’re all headed for obscurity. Don’t worry about it. Nobody knew you 200 years ago either.

 

[Solmyr]

It is sheer fantasy to claim that a **purposeless **distribution of **purposeless **objects is comparable to a person’s **insight **and control of events.Where is the evidence that **mindless **arrangements of molecules have ever created a rational being?

The evidence is before your very eyes, but discussing it is currently forbidden.

Whether a person jumps out of an airplane (without a parachute to commit suicide) or a meteor strikes the same target, there is no difference - devastation follows. By the way, “purpose” is not inherent in an action. The person had an intent (purpose), the meteor did not. And yet, the result is the same.

 

[Solmyr]

Why do some people prefer to be atheists?

The title of the thread is already nonsensical. People don’t PREFER to be atheists. A believer cannot volitionally change her deeply ingrained belief and become an atheist. It can happen that a believer loses her faith, due to some traumatic event, but even that is rare. Usually they rationalize it somehow.

But if someone loses her faith, it can be an emotionally liberating moment. No more Peeping Tom in the sky, who approves or disapproves every moment of your life. Who just waits for you to commit a normal act, which called “mortal sin” and then off you go into the eternal fire.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

But if someone loses her faith, it can be an emotionally liberating moment. No more Peeping Tom in the sky, who approves or disapproves every moment of your life. Who just waits for you to commit a normal act, which called “mortal sin” and then off you go into the eternal fire.

You have touched on a rather relevant point here.

I have believed for a long time now that many atheists have CHOSEN atheism as a philosophy because their minds have been darkened by sin . They know God is watching, but they choose to deny that there even is a God, never mind a God who is watching them sin their lives away.

The believer at least has a modicum of humility. He knows he is a sinner, and he knows that justice and mercy are in the offing. The atheist believe neither in ultimate justice nor ultimate mercy. That is why God is dead so far as he is concerned.

Having left atheism behind in my own life, that is how I assess the reason for my conversion.

I believe in both ultimate justice and ultimate mercy, whereas before I was dead to both because I lived in the shadows of sin.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

You have touched on a rather relevant point here.

I have believed for a long time now that many atheists have CHOSEN atheism as a philosophy because their minds have been darkened by sin . They know God is watching, but they choose to deny that there even is a God, never mind a God who is watching them sin their lives away.

I don’t get why this bizarre line of logic persist among believers. What you’ve described would maybe be someone who decides to disobey God while acknowledging His existence. This is not an atheist though. I do not believe God or gods exist. From my pov this is the same as denying leprechauns whom are fictitious until proven otherwise.
There is no pot of gold that i know of then deny for some bizarre reason. Leprechauns are not dead to me because I don’t believe they ever existed.

The believer at least has a modicum of humility. He knows he is a sinner, and he knows that justice and mercy are in the offing. The atheist believe neither in ultimate justice nor ultimate mercy. That is why God is dead so far as he is concerned.

Having left atheism behind in my own life, that is how I assess the reason for my conversion.

I believe in both ultimate justice and ultimate mercy, whereas before I was dead to both because I lived in the shadows of sin.

If these concepts and beliefs bring you happiness then I won’t stop you. I suppose there isn’t a one size fits all answer to why some believer or don’t believe.

 

[tonyrey]

*It is sheer fantasy to claim that a **purposeless ***

What you are referring to has never been witnessed. It is a theory which doesn’t correspond to the way we live. The gulf between mind and matter is enormous but you ignore it as if Chance is omnipotent! You deify physical energy even though it cannot explain itself - by which I mean that we have never encountered any being apart from a person who understands words such as “explain”, “evidence” and “forbidden”.

Whether a person jumps out of an airplane (without a parachute to commit suicide) or a meteor strikes the same target, there is no difference - devastation follows. By the way, “purpose” is not inherent in an action. The person had an intent (purpose), the meteor did not. And yet, the result is the same.

It doesn’t follow that the same results always have the same cause. You are begging the question by assuming there is no essential difference between a purposeful person and a purposeless meteor…

 

[tonyrey]

The title of the thread is already nonsensical. People don’t PREFER to be atheists. A believer cannot volitionally change her deeply ingrained belief and become an atheist. It can happen that a believer loses her faith, due to some traumatic event, but even that is rare. Usually they rationalize it somehow.

But if someone loses her faith, it can be an emotionally liberating moment. No more Peeping Tom in the sky, who approves or disapproves every moment of your life. Who just waits for you to commit a normal act, which called “mortal sin” and then off you go into the eternal fire.

Your notion of God is defective because you don’t take into account free will. If you are compelled to be an atheist your scheme of things is worthless because you are no more than a biological computer programmed by events beyond its control. There is no guarantee that your programming is superior to a theist’s.

 

[Maximus_Power]

I hope to hell you don’t lose your faith.

And what’s with the statement about not being remembered in 200 years? Do you remember anyone from 1815? We’re all headed for obscurity. Don’t worry about it. Nobody knew you 200 years ago either.

Earthy obscurity means nothing, so long as there is an afterlife. So long as God exists humanity has a rational purpose for existing in the first place.

I also hope I don’t lose my faith. Thank you.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I don’t get why this bizarre line of logic persist among believers. What you’ve described would maybe be someone who decides to disobey God while acknowledging His existence. This is not an atheist though.

The atheist’s refusal to recognize God may well be tied to his refusal to recognize his own sins as such. If one is worried about wrongdoing and its consequences, it is easy enough to rationalize the gravity of those sins by saying there is no God to guarantee those consequences.

 

[aclausen]

Is anything necessary?

It seems your ultimate explanation is **physical **necessity despite your reliance on intangible thought to arrive at all your conclusions. You kick away the ladder which enables you to have a panoramic view of reality! To derive everything from nothing is slightly less preposterous because it doesn’t require a preconceived conclusion that matter is more powerful than the mind…

The problem here is that I don’t actually accept that the ladder is necessary.

 

[aclausen]

The atheist’s refusal to recognize God may well be tied to his refusal to recognize his own sins as such. If one is worried about wrongdoing and its consequences, it is easy enough to rationalize the gravity of those sins by saying there is no God to guarantee those consequences.

Pure nonsense. My atheism has nothing to do with sin. It was, in my view, rationally derived and supported. You may disagree with my logic, but you are attempting to impose your own personal views on atheism on other people.

 

[Maximus_Power]

Pure nonsense. My atheism has nothing to do with sin. It was, in my view, rationally derived and supported. You may disagree with my logic, but you are attempting to impose your own personal views on atheism on other people.

Since we all share the same reality. If God doesn’t exists your atheism has nothing to do with sin, but if God does exists your atheism has everything to do with him. From your sinful nature, to your sinful family, to temporal punishments, and finally to your reprobate mind.

 

[Lou2U]

Not Atheist, but Agnostic.

I don’t prefer to be Agnostic, but I’ve never been anything else. I’ve never felt the need to, I suppose. That being said, if I felt as though I did believe in a religion, I wouldn’t stay being Agnostic. I’d believe in the religion.

Lou

 

[aclausen]

What you are referring to has never been witnessed. It is a theory which doesn’t correspond to the way we live. The gulf between mind and matter is enormous but you ignore it as if Chance is omnipotent! You deify physical energy even though it cannot explain itself - by which I mean that we have never encountered any being apart from a person who understands words such as “explain”, “evidence” and “forbidden”.

The gap you refer to is a bit of circular reasoning that comes out of your religious beliefs requiring some form of dualism. Everything I’ve seen in two centuries of research of neuroscience points to the “mind” simply being an emergent property of the vertebrate brain (although some invertebrates, like the octopus, also have a pretty sophisticated brain).

Simply declaring there is a gap doesn’t mean there is one, and trying to demand I be convinced simply because your religious beliefs demand the mind be immaterial.

 

[aclausen]

Since we all share the same reality. If God doesn’t exists your atheism has nothing to do with sin, but if God does exists your atheism has everything to do with him. From your sinful nature, to your sinful family, to temporal punishments, and finally to your reprobate mind.

Apparently we are all sinners, so it strikes that, from a Christian theological view, being an atheist is merely one more item to add to the pile of all the ways we are all depraved.

I’m sure an infinite and omnipotent being, one capable of creating universes, isn’t going to be too terribly put out by the odd inhabitant of a very tiny corner of the universe not immediately believing that said being exists.

It’s largely why I imagine that if I did decide there must be a Prime Mover, I can’t imagine why I would pick the Judeao-Christian deity, or why I would feel the need to have to worship such a being. But that’s an entirely different topic.