Atheism and Self-Esteem

[Caffeine Socialism]

Nathan, I congratulate you. Your ranting abilities are top-notch.

 

[Jedi]

...or more acceptable because you are accepted by God...

Romans 2:11 reads, “For God does not show favoritism.” The Christian isn’t any more loved by God than an atheist is.

Seems to be Christians can be just as "prideful" as atheists, by your definition.

I don’t see how. Interesting how the atheistic misconception that Christians think they’re better than atheists rules supreme here.

thats [sic] crazy i [sic] am an atheist and i believe in evolution, and i [sic] am not any different than anyone else "christian [sic] or non-believer" I am not someone and i [sic] don't know anyone that believes like me that is conceited, and prideful thats [sic] then crazyer [sic]

Then your experience in watching atheists discuss things with Christians/Theologians is very limited. The vast majority of atheists I have discussed theology, philosophy, and science with online over a couple years’ time have all been very clear in their condescending tones.

I know alot [sic] of christians [sic] that are conceited and prideful,

I have yet to see a Christian be prideful because he realizes that God has rescued him in spite of himself and that he is loved, just like everyone else, by the God of the Universe.

sure you can have pride for the work you do i [sic] know come people in my college that are going to be really good scienceist [sic] and they have pride for there work.

You’re now using the word “pride” in a different sense. You’re using it now with “proud” being more like “satisfied with.” When I am proud of an A I get on a test, I am not prideful about it in thinking that I’m better than those around me who didn’t get A’s, rather, I am satisfied with my work and pleased with the outcome. This isn’t pride in the truest sense of the word.

But there not any different any another else, Thats [sic] what i [sic] hate about the world to day IF you believe in something different people think you are different. NO one is better than anyone people shouldn't say anything bad about anyone just cause you believe different.

What you say is quite true. What you choose to believe in does not change your value as a person.

So if you are conceited and prideful you are an atheist that bull. LIke [sic] i [sic] said there is alot [sic] of christians [sic] that are conceited and prideful.

That's not what's being said here. Atheists, from years of discussing subjects such as these online, have seemed to show a very clear demonstration of pride/arrogance (generally speaking). However, just because you're conceited doesn't make you an atheist. And again, I have yet to see a single Christian who thinks of himself as better than others because God loves him just as much as the next man, and that God saved him when the Christian couldn't save himself.

The premise of this thread is inherently flawed. The effects of a belief on self-esteem have no bearing on whether the belief is true. I'm sure that I could create a belief system that just built up my self-esteem, but would that make it true? No.

You misunderstand the premise of this topic then. I have said this before in this topic, and I’ll say it again: This topic isn’t arguing for which conclusion is true, only that the atheistic/evolutionary perspective is much more of a problem for the self-esteem of others.

The funny thing is that the essay which started this thread is based on a Post Hoc fallacy. Carlson and Decker would have us believe that atheism and evolution are responsible for teen suicide, drug abuse, crime, and violence. The implied answer would be to do away with these nasty things. never mind the broken homes, abuse, molestation, and negative influences from parents, peers, school, religion, and other authority figures. let's blame it on Darwin.

If you’ll re-read the article, you will find out that Carlson and Decker didn’t write the article. Secondly, it doesn’t say anywhere in the essay that the doctrines of evolution are the sole cause for the problems of drugs, suicide, violence, etc. What it does illustrate is that it contributes to the problems by working against the self-esteem of those who believe it to be true.

I suppose Carlson and Decker believe that suicide, drugs, and violence were unknown in pre-evolutionary society.

As evolution gains acceptance, suicide rates have been rising. In 1996, more teenagers and young adults died of suicide than from cancer, heart disease, AIDS, birth defects, stroke, pneumonia and influenza, and chronic lung disease combined. Just something to take note of.

On the other side, Christianity (notice how only Christianity bolsters self-esteem; there's no reference to any other religion) is a perfect paradigm in which life is just peachy and everyone is happy because we all have a purpose that God set out for us (notice the lack of any mention of the hell that awaits those who don't live up to that purpose).

Again, you seem to have no idea of what you’re talking about and you rant on in bias ignorance. Jesus spoke more of hell than he did of Heaven (Don't believe me? Read the Bible). If you actually read what the early church went through, you’ll find out very quickly that no one in the Bible portrays Christian life as “just peachy.” In Matthew 16: 24, Jesus said, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” That hardly illustrates a life of ease. Further, Jesus goes on to say in John 15:18, “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.” I’m finding it a little difficult in trying to find the “peachiness” of it all.

I can't imagine Carlson and Decker went to all this trouble to point out the ills of the world without considering a solution. So, what is it?

In a word? Jesus.

How do we get society back on track? Do away with evolutionary theory? Tell all those scientists they're wrong?

The idea that man is a result of blind chance and natural forces combined is not science, but naturalistic philosophy masquerading as science. Did you observe man come about by evolutionary processes? Did you observe that God wasn't behind the scenes making it work out? Why can’t it be God behind evolution making things work? Oh, that’s right, because that doesn’t fit into your atheistic world-view. So now it’s not a problem with science, since science is not the problem at all, but rather because the solution conflicts with your atheistic/naturalistic presuppositions.

And what about atheism? how do solve the "problem" with that? Make Christianity the law of the land?

Nope. Usually, when you try to force something down someone’s throat, they tend to hate it more and are only pushed away. For as long as there is free will, there will always be those who choose to abuse it and reject God.

Follow religious law to the letter? How about mandatory church attendance? I seem to remember a bunch of guys who tried that. They called themselves the Taliban.

Oh, that’s good. Try to associate Christianity with a terrorist group. There’s that atheistic condescending tone again (It seems to never fail to make an appearance in discussions such as these). And no, that’s not the answer, just like I said above.

So please, Jedi, post the rest of the essay!

That was it.

Tell us what wisdom Carlson and Decker have to offer for us poor atheists, evolutionaries, heretics, blasphemers, scoffers, backsliders, agnostics, and freethinkers who obviously have such terribly low self esteem.

Again, Carlson and Decker didn’t write the essay. They brought the essay, written by someone else, to the attention of others just as I have here.

I eagerly await their insipred [sic] guidance.

Need I say more about the atheistic condescending/mocking tone?

Nathan, I agree. People who want to blame everything on our modern understanding of biology need to get a clue.

No, it’s people labeling their naturalistic beliefs as “science” and then telling people they’re dumb if they disagree with this “science” which needs to be stopped. It’s a straw man naturalists use to attack people like Christians.

Nathan, I congratulate you. Your ranting abilities are top-notch

His rants are largely based on ignorance of what he’s talking about mixed in with a clear amount of mockery. Is that what you call top-notch?

 

[Pete Harcoff]

I have said this before in this topic, and I’ll say it again: This topic isn’t arguing for which conclusion is true, only that the atheistic/evolutionary perspective is much more of a problem for the self-esteem of others.

Then, Jedi, your premise is flawed. I have to meet or even hear of anyone who succumbed to depression because they believe they are descended from "primordial soup". Typically, people with self-esteem problems have far deeper problems than what's found in a basic biology textbook.

Of course, if you want to back up your assertion with medical statistics, then I'd be more than happy to consider your viewpoint. Until then, you're just spewing out philosophical speculation.

(Oh, and you don't have to dissect every single sentence from every single post directed at you. I'd hate to see you abandon yet another line of debate because you don't have time for it anymore).

 

[WinAce]

People building their self-esteem on Bronze Age mythology... now *that's* more depressing than evolution could hope to be.

 

[KingzKid]

and here I am wondering what all these atheists are doing on a Christian forum................

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Jedi
I have yet to see a Christian be prideful because he realizes that God has rescued him in spite of himself and that he is loved, just like everyone else, by the God of the Universe.

I've known (and know) prideful Christians, but I've never known a Christian who both understood the source of his/her salvation and was also prideful about it. The pride I've seen is always due to a misunderstanding or rejection of the Gospel (legalism, etc.)

Originally posted by Jedi
No, it’s people labeling their naturalistic beliefs as “science” and then telling people they’re dumb if they disagree with this “science” which needs to be stopped. It’s a straw man naturalists use to attack people like Christians.

Thank you for saying that. This is what I find objectionable, too. Reject evolution, and the ignorant evolutionist claims you are rejecting science. The problem is that evolution isn't science. Biology, geology, etc., are sciences. Evolution is speculation.

 

[Humanista]

Originally posted by Caffeine Socialism
Nathan, I congratulate you. Your ranting abilities are top-notch.

 

I second that. Keep up the good  rants, uh....work!

 

[Jedi]

Then, Jedi, your premise is flawed.

All right then, let’s see how.

I have to meet or even hear of anyone who succumbed to depression because they believe they are descended from "primordial soup". Typically, people with self-esteem problems have far deeper problems than what's found in a basic biology textbook.

Again, nowhere in the essay/article does it say that this is the sole cause for depression, drug abuse, violence, etc. However, it does contribute to such things.

Of course, if you want to back up your assertion with medical statistics, then I'd be more than happy to consider your viewpoint. Until then, you're just spewing out philosophical speculation.

Over the past 50 years, suicide has gotten significantly worse (I would have thought this to be common knowledge). Just type in “suicide rates” in a search engine online (i.e. Google.com, Yahoo.com, etc), and you’ll get all sorts of stuff. If someone already doesn’t think anyone loves him (depression), and believes the naturalistic philosophy that expands upon evolutionary studies (The idea that man is a mere product of time, chance, and natural forces – nothing more), then you can easily see how that could push him over the edge. It’s the mindset of “I don’t like myself, no one else likes me, I have no purpose in life, I am meaningless accident of nature, my fate is to die anyway, there's no objective basis to say that life is better than death, so let’s solve my problems and get this over with.”

(Oh, and you don't have to dissect every single sentence from every single post directed at you. I'd hate to see you abandon yet another line of debate because you don't have time for it anymore).

If it were merely a debate between you and I, it wouldn’t be a problem. However, I see no reason for me to even be in such discussions if I’m not going to reply to comments directed at me (would you?). Try discussing these things with 5 Christians on your own and see how time consuming it is.

 

[Humanista]

Jedi said:
"As evolution gains acceptance, suicide rates have been rising. In 1996, more teenagers and young adults died of suicide than from cancer, heart disease, AIDS, birth defects, stroke, pneumonia and influenza, and chronic lung disease combined. Just something to take note of."
___________________________________________________________

This is classic "it came after, therefore it was caused by" faulty reasoning. You hear the same thing being said by Christians bemoaning the absence of mandatory prayer in public schools.

Evolutionary theory is over 150 years old. Hmmmmm, has society changed AT ALL in 150 years? Has technology contributed in any way to stress and alienation? Has culture changed in any way that is destructive to families and children and which might lead to more teen suicide?
Can you show me studies where those who work with depressed teens--teachers, counselors, psychologists, judges---show that time after time, the kids curse evolutionary theory for their problems?
(I'm trying not to giggle here.)

 

[Jedi]

This is classic "it came after, therefore it was caused by" faulty reasoning.

You have yet to show how this naturalistic dogma does not play a role in how people perceive themselves (in this case, in a negative way, only adding to the depression of those who are already down on themselves. It makes the situation worse – not better). I am not saying that every evolutionist is depressed (especially since not all evolutionists follow the naturalistic philosophy concluding that man is nothing more than a product of blind, meaningless chance). However, this view only further slams the sense of worth a depressed person feels about himself/herself.

Evolutionary theory is over 150 years old. Hmmmmm, has society changed AT ALL in 150 years? Has technology contributed in any way to stress and alienation? Has culture changed in any way that is destructive to families and children and which might lead to more teen suicide?

What has been one of the largest changes in society in the way man looks at himself over the last 150 years? Evolution (And elusively, Naturalistic philosophy masquerading as science under the veil of evolution) ranks pretty high on that list.

Can you show me studies where those who work with depressed teens--teachers, counselors, psychologists, judges---show that time after time, they kids curse evolutionary theory for their problems?

Those who actually go through with suicide usually don’t tell others about it (Those who tell people they’re going to commit suicide generally don’t want to, and are merely seeking attention/help). It’d be kind of hard to get statistics without knowing who to really ask.

Anyway, again, you have yet to show how the Naturalistic philosophy under the guise of evolution is not a contributor to the problem at hand.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Originally posted by Jedi
Again, nowhere in the essay/article does it say that this is the sole cause for depression, drug abuse, violence, etc. However, it does contribute to such things.

Over the past 50 years, suicide has gotten significantly worse (I would have thought this to be common knowledge). Just type in “suicide rates” in a search engine online (i.e. Google.com, Yahoo.com, etc), and you’ll get all sorts of stuff. If someone already doesn’t think anyone loves him (depression), and believes the naturalistic philosophy that expands upon evolutionary studies (The idea that man is a mere product of time, chance, and natural forces – nothing more), then you can easily see how that could push him over the edge. It’s the mindset of “I don’t like myself, no one else likes me, I have no purpose in life, I am meaningless accident of nature, my fate is to die anyway, there's no objective basis to say that life is better than death, so let’s solve my problems and get this over with.”

So now you're an amateur psychologist. Please, go ahead a try to prove that evolution is tied into suicides and other social evils (if it helps, Kent Hovind discusses such things on his very first video ).

Oh, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that over in the Middle East they're having problems with suicidal behavior, too. Somehow, I don't think it's tied in with naturalistic view points, however.

If it were merely a debate between you and I, it wouldn’t be a problem. However, I see no reason for me to even be in such discussions if I’m not going to reply to comments directed at me (would you?). Try discussing these things with 5 Christians on your own and see how time consuming it is.

My point was that you don't have to be quite so loquacious in your replies. Neat and concise responses will probably keep you in this debate longer.

 

[Jedi]

So now you're an amateur psychologist. Please, go ahead a try to prove that evolution is tied into suicides and other social evils (if it helps, Kent Hovind discusses such things on his very first video

It should be fairly easy to see. If this is the image someone has of himself (worthless, accidental, meaningless, evolved pond scum), then how much more likely an option is suicide?

Oh, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that over in the Middle East they're having problems with suicidal behavior, too. Somehow, I don't think it's tied in with naturalistic view points, however.

They’re having war problems. Suicide bombings are basically the only strategy left over for most of those people over there (They don’t have access to all sorts of neat weapons, so they just strap bombs to themselves and take out as much of the enemy as possible). Not to mention that the main people doing these terrorist bombings are Islamic, and the God of Islam is not love (unlike the God of Christianity). I cannot recall a single scrap of Islamic doctrine/scripture that illustrates the love of God for his people (Islam seems to be more loyalty/war centered). In fact, as I recall, the only sure-fire way to get into Heaven as a Muslim is to die during Jihad. Are you now saying that the Naturalistic doctrines are on equal grounds as the theology of those who committed a terrorist act of suicide (for the sake of Jihad) on September 11 (since both ideas are alike in that they contribute to suicidal thoughts of those who believe in them). Heh, ironic how it’s now Naturalism being compared to terrorists instead of Christianity a few posts ago.

My point was that you don't have to be quite so loquacious in your replies. Neat and concise responses will probably keep you in this debate longer.

I find it much more thorough to go through each post sentence by sentence to make sure that I replied to everything someone has said (that way, no one can complain that I didn’t address a point that was made in their post).

 

[lithium.]

Originally posted by Jedi
It should be fairly easy to see. If this is the image someone has of himself (worthless, accidental, meaningless, evolved pond scum), then how much more likely an option is suicide?

[wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] i wish people would really learn about evolution before posting anything about it. Evolution has nothing to do with suicides. Crazy religist people have nothing to do with evolution it has to do with GOD.

 

[blader]

It should be fairly easy to see. If this is the image someone has of himself (worthless, accidental, meaningless, evolved pond scum), then how much more likely an option is suicide?

Strangely, I see myself as neither worthless, accidental, meaningless, or evolved pond scum.

Considering that I am the end product of hundreds of million years of refinement for survivability, that I am a member of the species out of many, many millions in evolutionary history that has finally come out on top of the evolutionary race, I feel like a million bucks, thanks.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Originally posted by Jedi
If you’ll re-read the article, you will find out that Carlson and Decker didn’t write the article. Secondly, it doesn’t say anywhere in the essay that the doctrines of evolution are the sole cause for the problems of drugs, suicide, violence, etc. What it does illustrate is that it contributes to the problems by working against the self-esteem of those who believe it to be true.

This is true. But the fact that C+D chose to include this article (I'm assuming verbatim) would clearly show that they agree with it. Without reading the rest of their book, I can only assume that the premise of the article itself is used as part of the foundation of a larger argument. When the article is exposed for the fallacy it is, the foundation weakens, and the entire argument crumbles in their faces, much like the foolish man who builds his house upon the sand (Matthew 7:26, although I'm subsituting the words of logic for the words of Christ).

As evolution gains acceptance, suicide rates have been rising. In 1996, more teenagers and young adults died of suicide than from cancer, heart disease, AIDS, birth defects, stroke, pneumonia and influenza, and chronic lung disease combined. Just something to take note of.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc. Show me one documented link, from a reputable study, that shows a connection between evolutionary theory and teen suicide. You can't; there is none. By 1996, Bill Clinton was re-elected president, Seinfeld was the most popular show on television, and grunge music was finally out of style. Evolution is no more responsible for teen suicide than any of those events were. So what's your point?

Again, you seem to have no idea of what you’re talking about and you rant on in bias ignorance. Jesus spoke more of hell than he did of Heaven (Don't believe me? Read the Bible). If you actually read what the early church went through, you’ll find out very quickly that no one in the Bible portrays Christian life as “just peachy.” In Matthew 16: 24, Jesus said, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” That hardly illustrates a life of ease. Further, Jesus goes on to say in John 15:18, “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.” I’m finding it a little difficult in trying to find the “peachiness” of it all.

You are right, of course, although I find that a little odd. Christianity does seem to stress the evil and persecution of this world, and the beauty of the Kingdom of God is occasionally mentioned. Evolution might lead people to low self-esteem, through unpleasant facts about their place in the universe, but Christianity, and religion and general, goes the step further to actively promote suicide (under the guises of self-sacrifice and martyrdom). Why not take issue with that? I suppose the Crusades, Jihads, and Inquisitions throughout history prove that religion stresses killing others instead. But that's ok, because they were "wicked."

In a word? Jesus.

In two words? prove it. 

The idea that man is a result of blind chance and natural forces combined is not science, but naturalistic philosophy masquerading as science.

And doing a pretty good masquerade, it would seem. Evolutionary theory is observable, testable, and falsifiable. It is science, and an army of strawmen will not change that.

Did you observe man come about by evolutionary processes? Did you observe that God wasn't behind the scenes making it work out?

let me get this straight: You believe God is the creator, and the only way for me to refute that is to witness Him not creating? Sorry, friend, you've made the claim for Creation over Evolutionary theory. The burden of proof is on you.

Why can’t it be God behind evolution making things work? Oh, that’s right, because that doesn’t fit into your atheistic world-view. So now it’s not a problem with science, since science is not the problem at all, but rather because the solution conflicts with your atheistic/naturalistic presuppositions.

A clever combination of Ad Hominem and Hasty Generalization. Who said I was an atheist? As it so happens, I do believe in a supreme being. And should this Being requre anything of me, He/She/It/They know where to find me, and how to get my attention.

 We can also toss in a healthy dose of Circular Reasoning: You still haven't proven that God is responsible for evolution, let alone that He is the "solution" to anything.

Nope. Usually, when you try to force something down someone’s throat, they tend to hate it more and are only pushed away. For as long as there is free will, there will always be those who choose to abuse it and reject God.

If the God of the Bible truly exists, then free will is an illusion. I started the thread on that here: http://www.christianforums.com/threads/24208.html

Oh, that’s good. Try to associate Christianity with a terrorist group. There’s that atheistic condescending tone again (It seems to never fail to make an appearance in discussions such as these). And no, that’s not the answer, just like I said above.

It's not Christianity specifically that I'm attacking, but to blame a science or philosophy for the problems of the world leads to the outlawing of independant thought in favor of blind dogma. The Taliban tried it. Fundamentalists of all religions, including Christianity, have tried it. Science has never tried it. Draw your own conclusions.

No, it’s people labeling their naturalistic beliefs as “science” and then telling people they’re dumb if they disagree with this “science” which needs to be stopped. It’s a straw man naturalists use to attack people like Christians.

Any why exactly is evolutionary theory not "science"? What exactly makes it a "naturalistic philosophy"? Where's the masquerade you were talking about?

His rants are largely based on ignorance of what he’s talking about mixed in with a clear amount of mockery. Is that what you call top-notch? [/B]

Ignorance and mockery? Well, that's why they call it a rant. I didn't consider the original article worth the time for any serious research. Apparantly Carlson and Decker (as well as yourself) feel the same way about evolution.

As least have the honesty to call it a rant like I do; that way the rest of us know to not take it seriously.

 

[blader]

Originally posted by Jedi
Romans 2:11 reads, “For God does not show favoritism.” The Christian isn’t any more loved by God than an atheist is.

So God sends the atheist to burn in hell because he loves him equally as the Christian who goes to heaven? Is God bipolar?

I don’t see how. Interesting how the atheistic misconception that Christians think they’re better than atheists rules supreme here.

And how the Christian misconcption that atheists think they're better than Christians rules supreme, everywhere.

You’re now using the word “pride” in a different sense. You’re using it now with “proud” being more like “satisfied with.” When I am proud of an A I get on a test, I am not prideful about it in thinking that I’m better than those around me who didn’t get A’s, rather, I am satisfied with my work and pleased with the outcome. This isn’t pride in the truest sense of the word.

Well, in that case, I'm very proud too. But not prideful.

That's not what's being said here. Atheists, from years of discussing subjects such as these online, have seemed to show a very clear demonstration of pride/arrogance (generally speaking). However, just because you're conceited doesn't make you an atheist.

I suppose that's a matter of opinion. From reading your own previous posts, a good number of your own posts are also tinged with condescenion and arrogance. Which is part of the reason why I always choose to reply to them. =)

If you’ll re-read the article, you will find out that Carlson and Decker didn’t write the article. Secondly, it doesn’t say anywhere in the essay that the doctrines of evolution are the sole cause for the problems of drugs, suicide, violence, etc. What it does illustrate is that it contributes to the problems by working against the self-esteem of those who believe it to be true.

That depends on your point of view. It might lower yours, but it actually bolsters mine. See above post.

The idea that man is a result of blind chance and natural forces combined is not science, but naturalistic philosophy masquerading as science. Did you observe man come about by evolutionary processes? Did you observe that God wasn't behind the scenes making it work out? Why can’t it be God behind evolution making things work? Oh, that’s right, because that doesn’t fit into your atheistic world-view. So now it’s not a problem with science, since science is not the problem at all, but rather because the solution conflicts with your atheistic/naturalistic presuppositions.

So paleontology, geology, and archaeology can not be considered science?

Besides, evolution says nothing about whether there is a God behind the scenes making it work out. It leaves plenty of room for theistic evolutionists, as evidenced by the considerable number of Christian evolutionary biologists.

 

[blader]

As evolution gains acceptance, suicide rates have been rising. In 1996, more teenagers and young adults died of suicide than from cancer, heart disease, AIDS, birth defects, stroke, pneumonia and influenza, and chronic lung disease combined. Just something to take note of.

As Intel processors gains acceptance, suicide rates have been rising. In 1996, more teenagers and young adults died of suicide than from cancer, heart disease, AIDS, birth defects, stroke, pneumonia and influenza, and chronic lung disease combined. Just something to take note of.

 

[blader]

delete

 

[WinAce]

Originally posted by npetreley

The problem is that evolution isn't science. Biology, geology, etc., are sciences. Evolution is speculation.

*Blink blink*

Did I miss something? Do you also reject plate tectonics, the theory underlying all or most of geology, as 'unscientific'? Or is it just evolution, the theory underlying all of biology, that's fair game?

 

[lithium.]

Originally posted by blader
Strangely, I see myself as neither worthless, accidental, meaningless, or evolved pond scum.

Considering that I am the end product of hundreds of million years of refinement for survivability, that I am a member of the species out of many, many millions in the evolutionary that has finally come out on top of the evolutionary race, I feel like a million bucks, thanks.

I completely agree. Great post blader.