The origins of atheism

[Davian]

1. That quote belongs to one of the greatest saints in the Orthodox Church and it requires a huge theological knowledge in order to understand his work and his sayings.

2. Christianity has failed in exactly nothing. People have failed in comprehending christianity.

If you are unconvincing, it must be someone else's fault. I'll have to remember that.

...

4. Christianity does not, neither it builds on science or has to be forced in order to fit the secular world. Following the Holy Fathers, Orthodoxy uses science and philosophy to defend and explain her Faith. Unlike Roman Catholicism, she does not build on the results of philosophy and science. The Church does not seek to reconcile faith and reason. She makes no effort to prove by logic or science what Christ gave His followers to believe. If physics or biology or chemistry or philosophy lends support to the teachings of the Church, she does not refuse them. However, Orthodoxy is not intimidated by man's intellectual accomplishments. She does not bow to them and change the Christian Faith to make it consistent with the results of human thought and science.
...

Yet you would rather that a the story of a "God" that allegedly walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, not simply be dismissed as myth. A bit of a conundrum you have there.

 

[Davian]

It is part of an unholy triad: atheism, science, and evolution.

If you could get rid of those three, would your god pop into existence? Would everyone suddenly accept your particular theology?

When you're done laughing, could you demonstrate an answer to my question please?

I'm not done laughing.

 

[LynnC]

Hi Lynn, well, I can appreciate what you are saying, the ISIS movement is horrific to us......But sadly, what they are doing is no different that the God of Old Testament Judaism if you are familiar with the atrocities blamed on him committed by men. The ISIS people get their Ideas from their scripture book.

A few notes...

In Genesis 7:21-23 God drowns the entire population of the earth: men, women, children, fetuses, and animals.
God cleansed the earth.

In Exodus 12:29 God the baby-killer slaughters all Egyptian firstborn children and cattle because their king was stubborn.

In Numbers 16:41-49 the Israelites complain that God is killing too many of them. So, God sends a plague that kills 14,000 more of them.

In 1 Samuel 6:19 God kills 50,000 men for peeking into the ark of the covenant.
I don't actually think that 'God killed' men for looking into the ark. I think it was a consequence which God warned against, because the ark contained a deadly power. God actually tried to warn the people to save them.

In Numbers 31:7-18 the Israelites kill all the Midianites except for the virgins, whom they are allowed to rape as spoils of war.
Just a note on this... I never took, 'keep them for yourselves' as meaning keep the women to rape them. I always took it to mean merely save the women for you will be needing wives if you are to produce and have children. I do not know that we can really say how brutish, or not brutish, the men were with the women. (We do know that ISIS is brutish with women... and perhaps they do follow the same 'god'... the one that is a demon of this world... the deceiver, and misleader.)

In 2 Kings 2:23-24, some kids tease the prophet Elisha, and God sends bears to dismember them.
This one, I just don't know what to say. Jewish scribes with a strange sense of justice? I can see no defense of this passage at all.

 

[Davian]

Hi Mark,

As I said in the past, there is neutral, 'just stay off my lawn and keep your Holly books out of secular governance, which I do respect, and then there is the promotion of Godless ideals, an attempt to discredit faith and religion.

What is a "godless" ideal?

Atheist on these forums may be enamored by their own intellectual masturbation, but they are pretty simple regardless of the multiplicity of clever arguments. They come to Christian forms to hurt and convert, not help.

I am not aware of any that do that, but I do presume that you are here of your own volition?

By the same token, people of faith go to Atheist forums (I presume) to convert, argue, pester etc.

They do, but from what I have seen they quickly descend into preaching and get banned. Yet even here, they flout the rules of this forum, and continue to preach and try to convert.

* To me faith is reasonable, to view the universe as either entirely spiritual or entirely material is to distort reality. Not everyone will "get it", not every acorn will become a tree.

Not every person is a nut.

 

[Davian]

Simple, their are people who are genuine, sincere non-believers.

Not like those ones that will not keep quiet.

Old vs New

• Davian
• Aug 27, 2015

They want to be left alone to live out their lives.

Without the religionists pushing their religion into their countries' politics and education systems.

Jesus said it well "leave the dead to burry the dead"

What was this in reference to?

 

[LynnC]

People become more 'sinful' as they get older? I'm not sure I buy that. I mean, obviously I don't believe in the concept of sin, as a Christian would describe it, but I don't believe people become more immoral as they age, or more selfish.

Hi Oafman,

'Sin' is anything that hurts ourselves, or hurts others. Most often we don't see how our actions hurt us and others until much later after having fallen into the sinful way.

I do believe that people, who do not keep God as their center, become selfish. Particularly when going through young adulthood we fall away from God and His ways, preferring to follow our own ways... not wanting, or feeling able, to trust in God, and trusting instead in ourselves. Wanting what we want, and determined to get it in whatever way we think necessary. We are selfish little children, not willing to take 'no' for an answer to anything. Not willing to accept any will but our own. Believing that only we know what will satisfy us for our futures.

 

[Davian]

And some Atheist, apparently discontented with life, join religious forums so they can barf their discontent and anger all over anyone religious person who happens along so they can show them how stupid they are for having faith in whatever.....

Or some come by just to see if the religionists can offer a coherent, reasoned defence for their beliefs, or... this.

 

[Davian]

Should I assume then that atheists do believe in body, soul, and spirit?

(That's a YES or NO, by the way.)

Depends on how you are using those words.

""YES we have a soul but it's made of lots of tiny robots" and I thought that's exactly right. Yes we have a soul, but it's mechanical. But it's still a soul, it still does the work that the soul was supposed to do. It is the seat of reason. It is the seat of moral responsibility. It's why we are appropriate objects of punishment when we do evil things, why we deserve the praise when we do good things. It's just not a mysterious lump of wonder stuff... that will outlive us." - Daniel Dennett

 

[Davian]

And if what you say is true, then why do we put so much value on truth if the truth about existence can never be known?

I don't, if that "truth" does not amount to anything other than opinion.

It seems you think truth is meaningless.

I do think religious opinion is meaningless.

 

[Davian]

Then which one is myopic in your estimation?

The scientific realm, or the spiritual realm?

But you are not saying that science is myopic, but that it is wrong. Amirite?

 

[Belk]

Yes it is, chief.

But I'm not going to try and decipher what you're saying.

You're like most of the others I deal with.

Ask a simple question, get an "answer" that could mean six different things.

It is almost as if reality is complex and can't be reduced down to yes or no questions.

 

[Davian]

Yes it is, chief.

But I'm not going to try and decipher what you're saying.

You're like most of the others I deal with.

Ask a simple question, get an "answer" that could mean six different things.

Like what you mean by "invisible".

 

[Oafman]

'Sin' is anything that hurts ourselves, or hurts others.

If that were the widely accepted definition of sin, the world would be a much better place. But I'm afraid it's not. Many things considered to be sinful do not harm the 'sinner' or others. They were just determined as 'sins' at a time when, for one reason or another, people didn't like them, and it was convenient to throw the weight of religion behind oppressing them.

Homosexuality is the most obvious example. Accepting and acting on your sexuality does you no harm; in fact quite the opposite, and harms nobody else. But it is widely thought of as a sin, and not just by Christians.

Most often we don't see how our actions hurt us and others until much later after having fallen into the sinful way.

That's certainly true.

I do believe that people, who do not keep God as their center, become selfish

To me, that sounds kind of...offensive. And wrong, given that I don't believe there is a correlation between religiosity and selfishness.

Particularly when going through young adulthood we fall away from God and His ways, preferring to follow our own ways... not wanting, or feeling able, to trust in God, and trusting instead in ourselves. Wanting what we want, and determined to get it in whatever way we think necessary. We are selfish little children, not willing to take 'no' for an answer to anything. Not willing to accept any will but our own. Believing that only we know what will satisfy us for our futures.

I believe strongly that we should trust in ourselves. To the extent that I can't agree with any philosophy which encourages us to do otherwise.

 

[LynnC]

How are you using the word "god" here?

Greetings Arch,
god is the higher authority that we think we should obey
so whatever we choose to obey, that is our 'god'
so if we think we are our own higher authority and there is none that we ought to obey besides ourselves, then we have become our own god
if we worship money and strive after money and 'obey the money', then money(or consumerism) is our god... it is the thing we pursue... it is the thing we believe will bring happiness
it is whatever thing we give power to

(and I will add here that, only the true God will set you free.... all other gods will enslave you to the thing you chase after)

That's incorrect. To be an atheist simply means that you do not believe in gods. That's all.

You don't believe in an entity, 'God'... but you do believe in something... that something is your 'god'

Peace and blessings to you.

 

[Davian]

I understand what you're saying. I'm saying I have personal evidence that confirms the truth.

Using personal experience to confirm personal opinion?

Circular Reasoning Works Because Circular Reasoning Works

• Davian
• Jun 25, 2015

If I know something to be true but can't prove it, it's then up to you to believe me based on how reasonable my explanation is of what is true.

So far you can't find any valid reason to think that my claim is untrue

Asking someone to prove a negative is something I consider to be intellectually bankrupt.

that God has and is and will reveal the truth behind existence. Since you can't find a valid reason to think I'm lying, then it's up to you to believe me or be left in the dark regarding the truth. There will be physical evidence in the future that will prove this, but you're not going to like it when it comes because it will prove you wrong and you're going to have to deal with that.

Pretty basic crime scene investigation ability.

Not at all, lol.

 

[Davian]

... There will be physical evidence in the future that will prove this, but you're not going to like it when it comes because it will prove you wrong and you're going to have to deal with that.

Scare tactic fail.

 

[Davian]

I've said many times I can't force you to believe anything. I can only rationaly explain what I believe to be true. it's up to you to believe me. If you don't believe me that's fine for now. If you desire to find the truth about whether or not God exists and you haven't already determined that you'll never believe in God then I have hope that you will find the truth.

Hope that atheists will find the truth is really what it comes down to for me. Is that a bad thing to hope for?

I am not looking for religion, I am looking for accurate descriptions of reality.

 

[LynnC]

If that were the widely accepted definition of sin, the world would be a much better place. But I'm afraid it's not. Many things considered to be sinful do not harm the 'sinner' or others. They were just determined as 'sins' at a time when, for one reason or another, people didn't like them, and it was convenient to throw the weight of religion behind oppressing them.

Homosexuality is the most obvious example. Accepting and acting on your sexuality does you no harm; in fact quite the opposite, and harms nobody else. But it is widely thought of as a sin, and not just by Christians.

Greetings Oafman,
This is the lie of the deceiver to deceive.
Homosexuality does great harm. Think of the diseases born of this act.
The deceiver wants to destroy the creation. What better way than to pervert the act of procreation... to make humans burn with unnatural affections, and then to accept as natural those unnatural affections... affections that can produce no offspring, and affections that will cause only confusion to future generations, creating more unnatural affection, until the creation destroys itself.

It is natural to have affection for others of the same sex.
It is not natural to turn that affection into sexual affection.
It is the deceiver that causes the mind to turn a natural affection into an unnatural affection.

Homosexuality is indeed harmful to the creation.
It is why I said;
"Most often we don't see how our actions hurt us and others until much later after having fallen into the sinful way."

To me, that sounds kind of...offensive. And wrong, given that I don't believe there is a correlation between religiosity and selfishness.

I'm sorry that my statement sounds offensive to you. People most often are blind to their own selfishness. It is a perspective that changes, with some, according to age. Quite often as we age we can look back and see our selfishness. Some people, however, are never able to see it. It's just part of our sin nature that we, if we are Godly, must strive to overcome.

I believe strongly that we should trust in ourselves. To the extent that I can't agree with any philosophy which encourages us to do otherwise.

I understand... and that is the root of your a-theism ... your belief in yourself as all-knowing.

Peace and blessings to you.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Surely you must have wondered where you came from, why you were here, how you came to be?

Wondering isn't knowing in any sense that I'm familiar with. Wondering arises from not knowing. Yes, I have wondered many things, of course.

The built in knowing that we are born with, that something had to have created all this... created life.

Created? That's saying too much. Certainly I wondered what sort of processes had lead to everything that I could see. I had never assumed that everything must be an intelligent creation.

What do you think dictates that sense of morality and law?
It is that inner voice which is God living in you.

My inner voices are my own. They are a product of my psychology. That's me in there, even if not all of that is a product of the consciously thinking "ego".

And it is in large part my "external" voice that is responsible for my sense of morality and law. I have an interest in philosophy, and philosophy has guided me quite a bit in that regard. My "inner voices" are to some extent trained by that study. The ideas that people are exposed to have an influence on their conscience. That's why people can have very different politics, and yet all feel that their political opponents are bad people.

That is interesting because I can't say that I've heard it.
As far as I am concerned, it is my own original thought.

It may be, but I've heard it before many times.

eudaimonia

Hmmm, I looked that word up... it applies to my statement above.

Oh? In what way?

I have not decided if I am a spirit on a human journey, or a human on a spiritual journey.

I don't divide the two. I'm a human on a human journey, and that journey involves a great deal of introspection and pursuit of self-knowledge, and so it may be described as "spiritual" after a fashion.

Peace and blessings to you.

And to you.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[AV1611VET]

Hmm, an interesting question I hope to hear the answer to.

Considering those I asked, don't count on it.