Atheism

[TheNewbie]

Well, it's not that I find all religious belief irrational (just the claims that be disproved by solid evidence, e.g. new agey anti-vax crap, young earth creationism) but I do think all religious belief is arational. It may be a fine distinction, but the first involves a negative value judgement from me, the second is neutral. This is why my problem with religion only crops up when believers make claims to intellectual certainty based on faith. A deep feeling of certainty is not proof of a thing being true. Having a deep sense of certainty in some part of your life may be pretty necessary, however, for long term happiness.

For example, I'm pretty certain the fact that Colt King Cobras go for the prices they do proves many gun buyers have no goddamn sense at all. It what world should one of those go for more than pristine 1930s era Smiths? (No hate, pony boys, ah love muh Trooper.)

I do see a certain amount of arationality as essential to a decent human life. I heard a story on NPR about a brilliant engineer who had a brain injury that left him largely inable to feel emotion. His intellect was intact, but he was crippled because he couldn't make simple choices like choosing what color of pen to use.

My religious beliefs are based on evidence, reason and faith but I can't prove it to be true in the way I can prove I had a hamburger for lunch. Nor am I as certain of it. That's where the faith comes in.

It does seem religious people have more doubts than atheists and non believers.

[critter]

My religious beliefs are based on evidence, reason and faith but I can't prove it to be true in the way I can prove I had a hamburger for lunch. Nor am I as certain of it. That's where the faith comes in.

It does seem religious people have more doubts than atheists and non believers.

atheists and atheists? non believers and non believers? Not sure why your statement reads that way other than you must be conflating atheism with something else.

Darkness is not the opposite of light. Darkness is the absence of light (which would be the default position.. just to be annoyingly repetitive for the hell of it)

Atheism isn't the opposite of theism; it is the absence of theism.

[TheNewbie]

atheists and atheists? non believers and non believers? Not sure why your statement reads that way other than you must be conflating atheism with something else.

Darkness is not the opposite of light. Darkness is the absence of light (which would be the default position.. just to be annoyingly repetitive for the hell of it)

Atheism isn't not the opposite of theism, it is the absence of theism.

Some people don't like to be called atheists.

Do you believe in a living intelligent creator ?

[critter]

Some people don't like to be called atheists.

Do you believe in a living intelligent creator ?

Ah, ok, now I get why you use that type of phrasing.

I do believe in living, intelligent creators. Those would be humans. I don't believe in a living, intelligent creator deity. I don't believe in stupid non creator deities either. Though, were acceptable evidence presented that one deity does exist, I still wouldn't believe. I'd simply have no other option than to understand and accept that at least one (and possibly more by inference) does exist based on the evidence presented that the particular deity exists.

[UNM1136]

Confused - I thought we all had free will, and weren’t acting “of His will” or fulfilling some pre-destined master plan.
.

It's OK, I spend more time confused than I like to admit.

I don't believe in pre-destiny, but I do believe that we are His creations, and we are who and what we are. That is doing His will at the most basic level. I am enjoying the discourse here, it has value to me, and you have a role in that. So the electronic intersection of our lives right now is "His will". You being you, me being me, both of us interacting and (I assume) being genuine and true to what we believe.

There is another layer to "His will". A basic tenant of my faith is that all goodness, whether we acknowledge it or not, accept it or not, believe it or not originates from God's Holy Spirit. The decision to do something loving, compassionate, caring, for another is us electing to act in concert with the Holy Spirit. Your kindness is God acting through you, in concert with you, the same as when I am unselfish and giving. It is the clearest example of engaging our free will to align with His will, and also the least availed by me on a day to day basis. The early church referred to itself as the "body of Christ", not as sort of a club, but seeing an obligation to to do good works as though they were the hands for the Holy Spirit to work through. In the blink of an eye, God can feed all the hungry, but our voluntary role in it is what is important, and it takes effort. One of the biggest miraculous interventions of this world (I believe) is when the Holy Spirit (don't ask me about the Trinity, still working on that myself) whispers in our hearts and moves us to act selflessly to the benefit of another. We are free to act, or to not, to believe or not. In doing His will we are not always aware, we are not always capable, and few people live up to their potential on a regular basis. There is much more to this discussion, but I find the interwebs to be....limiting in this discourse.

Thirdly, and something that I really have to force myself to remember is that Faith is not really an exercise in the beginning, it is a gift from God. Like many gifts, the more you use it the better you get with it. Believers tend to put people in boxes; it is a human trait, and not an endearing one. We put people in boxes and point to those without faith as different; we fail to recognize that their gifts are different than ours, and lacking the gift of faith does not mean that one lacks character, goodness, morality or anything else that we as believers value. It could mean that they are finding those things in spite of the lack of the gift of faith, which should be celebrated. It could mean that we don't understand our roles in the world as clearly as we think we do. And regardless of what any of it could mean it is all part of God's will. All of us have gifts from God. All of us are loved by God. I see a lot of honesty and intellect in this thread, so those gifts are being put to use. You don't have to believe in order to make use of those gifts. And I don't need to convince you that you are wrong. I have plenty of PMs indicating that God's Holy Spirit is at work in this thread. So someone's gift of faith is stimulated by what they are seeing here, and, hopefully edified.

I have done martial arts for a few decades now. I used to teach children, and teaching children sucks. They are uncoordinated, lack strength, and lack focus. You are limited to what you can put in them, and expect them to retain, and perform. Some of those young martial artists with talent grow. At some point they internalize the kata to where they can begin to use some of that information outside of the rehearsed, pre-arranged kata. In doing so they develop coordination and strength. Some get better at kicking, some prefer to punch. They begin to learn the basics so well that the basics become a part of them. This is where generally new low level black belts are found. They understand the basics well enough to begin to be able to apply them. Sometimes a black belt gets confronted on da streetz, and I have seen it work out both ways, they win, or they get their buts kicked. Sometimes they begin exploring the movements of the martial arts and internalize them to the point that they become reflexive. They have stress inoculated their skills and know what they are capable of and what they are not, tend to be very technically proficient and skilled, and they become able to grasp concepts, rather than basic movements. They apply techniques unconventionally and have success because they understand the underlying principles. These mature senior black belts can then begin to teach properly, and tend to be pretty badass.

I see similar growth processes in believers.

Once again, I want to be done with this thread, so someone poke me again and see if I will rise to the bait.

pat

[TheNewbie]

Ah, ok, now I get why you use that type of phrasing.

I do believe in living, intelligent creators. Those would be humans. I don't believe in a living, intelligent creator deity. I don't believe in stupid non creator deities either. Though, were acceptable evidence presented that one deity does exist, I still wouldn't believe. I'd simply have no other option than to understand and accept that at least one (and possibly more by inference) does exist based on the evidence presented that the particular deity exists.

Funny, I look at a tree and see intelligent design. The same goes for procreation, a cow, the solar system and man's ability to build and create material things. I would say we are surrounded by evidence.

[critter]

Funny, I look at a tree and see intelligent design. The same goes for procreation, a cow, the solar system and man's ability to build and create material things. I would say we are surrounded by evidence.

For the sake of discussion, let's say that one or more of those would be considered scientifically acceptable evidence of a creator. How would you connect the dots from acceptable evidence of "a creator" to Judaeo-Christian Yahweh/Jehovah and all that follows?

[holmes168]

Likewise. Don’t assume that my thoughts here don’t mean that I wouldn’t be honored to assist you, go to the range together, take a class, share a meal/drink or be hosted in my home.

Yea, I know I’m kind of prickly on this subject. I was raised that way and it didn’t really get any better - but I do see more humor in it thse days.

I am not sure if you have heard of Lee Strobel- he is a former atheist turned Christian. His book The Case for Christ lays out the argument much better than I ever would be able to.

I can’t prove in a way that some will accept that God exists. I have faith that He does.

[TheNewbie]

For the sake of discussion, let's say that one or more of those would be considered scientifically acceptable evidence of a creator. How would you connect the dots from acceptable evidence of "a creator" to Judaeo-Christian Yahweh/Jehovah and all that follows?

You have a lot of faith in science. I trust common sense as much or more.



It doesn't. My argument here is not about proving a particular religion. My point is that denying that there is a creator for the complex earth, universe, and intelligent life would be like me saying that my iPhone formed over millions of years out of nowhere. No creator, just randomly formed.

[Irelander]

I’m glad this works for you and makes you happy. Your post is a very good summary of why I am not attracted to Christianity—belief in God notwithstanding. I’m just not cool with the idea that I’m somehow responsible for what someone else did 2000 years ago. I’ll own my sins and judge myself, thanks.

The Christian Bible teaches that you are NOT responsible for something Jesus did 2000 years ago. He did it all. He willingly gave up His life to pay the penalty for all the sins of His people. There is nothing you can do to get to heaven because Christ already did it.

I only hope that with this conversation we all at least look into the idea of what happens when we die (eternity). We all know that the world is broken, it's pretty evident. I think that Christianity presents the only viable solution to a broken world, a Savior, but that is a decision we all need to make for ourselves.