It's 2019, not 1519.

[lostinthought]

Science and the Bible go hand in hand. Science gives us evidence for the Bible and the Bible gives us evidence for Science.

Science tells us nothing more about the bible than:

Some people once wrote some documents at some point in the past.
Some of the documents were included in a book. Some were not.
The book was called the bible.
The documents contain some statements and claims that have been verified. However, those statements that have been verified have no bearing whatsoever on the validity of other statements.

Here's a quote from the first worldwide survey of religion and science:

Are all scientists atheists? Do they believe religion and science can co-exist? These questions and others were addressed in the first worldwide survey of how scientists view religion, released today by researchers at Rice University.

"No one today can deny that there is a popular 'warfare' framing between science and religion," said the study's principal investigator, Elaine Howard Ecklund, founding director of Rice University's Religion and Public Life Program and the Herbert S. Autrey Chair in Social Sciences. "This is a war of words fueled by scientists, religious people and those in between."

The study's results challenge longstanding assumptions about the science-faith interface. While it is commonly assumed that most scientists are atheists, the global perspective resulting from the study shows that this is simply not the case.

"More than half of scientists in India, Italy, Taiwan and Turkey self-identify as religious," Ecklund said. "And it's striking that approximately twice as many 'convinced atheists' exist in the general population of Hong Kong, for example, (55 percent) compared with the scientific community in this region (26 percent)."

The researchers did find that scientists are generally less religious than a given general population.

 

[AvisG]

Not really a fair comparison.

Christianity (or any active religion) is about so much more than the philosophical discussion: "is there a god?" What would be the point of Christians allowing atheists to derail every discussion about how to apply the Bible to daily living, or about the finer points of theology?

Atheism by contrast is just so..... small. There's no life-content there that theists could come in and disrupt.

The "unfair comparison" cuts in the opposite direction from what you are suggesting. It explains why atheists might be unwelcome at Christian sites, but not why Christians or other theists would be equally unwelcome at atheist sites (as they are). The answer is the one I gave - atheism as practiced on the internet is just another dogmatic fundamentalist religion.

There is no "life content" to atheism??? Don't tell an atheist that. Atheism informs an atheist's worldview and perspective on life to precisely the same extent that religion informs a believer's. A theistic perspective is as challenging and upsetting to a fundamentalist atheist as an atheistic perspective is to a fundamentalist believer.

 

[durangodawood]

The "unfair comparison" cuts in the opposite direction from what you are suggesting. It explains why atheists might be unwelcome at Christian sites, but not why Christians or other theists would be equally unwelcome at atheist sites (as they are). The answer is the one I gave - atheism as practiced on the internet is just another dogmatic fundamentalist religion.

There is no "life content" to atheism??? Don't tell an atheist that. Atheism informs an atheist's worldview and perspective on life to precisely the same extent that religion informs a believer's. A theistic perspective is as challenging and upsetting to a fundamentalist atheist as an atheistic perspective is to a fundamentalist believer.

Atheism is not a religion. Its a data point pretty much devoid of content aside from the binary question: God(s) yes/no? Atheists venture elsewhere, beyond that simple question, for their life-content.

Calling atheism a "religion" is a disservice to religion. A living religion is deep culture, with vast scripture and commentary, institutions, clergy, rituals, sacred places, devotional practices, etc. There's a lot at stake if you let atheists interrupt every discussion about those things with "but there is no God".

 

[lostinthought]

I completely disagree. Theists and non-theists look at exactly the same evidence and simply reach different conclusions, and that debate has raged since there were words to have it.

Why is a lack of scientific research relevant? Science isn't capable of determining God's existence.

Pick up a copy of Francis Schaeffer's trilogy and give it a read.

I didn't say that I'm a non-theist. I said I'm an Atheist.

Atheism is a response to the Theist claim that god exists. No more, no less. Atheism isn't a belief system. Atheists simply state that the Theist hypothesis that a god exists has failed to meet its burden of proof and, as such, reject the hypothesis.

Note that Atheists do not state that god does not exist. Apologies for the double negatives. Atheists merely reject the god hypothesis on the basis that the claim has not met its burden of proof.

If the god hypothesis does meet its burden of proof, then it would be dishonest and illogical not to amend our stance.

 

[lostinthought]

All I know is why I became a theist and why I then became an atheist. I grew up in a household that was indifferent to religion. My parents went to mass on Easter and Christmas to satisfy my grandparents. I had no opinion about god, didn't care. When I was in my 20's I started to read the Bible out of curiosity and then met my wife who was a Christian. Over the next 6 years or so I studied and became a Christian when I was 32. The reason I was convinced was because I was heavily influenced by my wife and her family and I only looked at the apologists side of things. I was not taught how to know what is true or not. I did not have the skills to know how to determine truth. I was convinced by apologist arguments because I never looked at the contrary arguments. I believe this is many believers experience.

Fast forward 18 years or so and I started to question Gods morality which led to questioning the validity of gods existence. I started to study epistemology and philosophy and this led to my understanding that I did not have valid reasons for my belief. During this time a person challenged me to study evolution so I did. What I found with my new found skepticism is that the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. This led to my throwing out the bible as actual truth. All of this made me unconvinced that god exists.

We need to teach our children how to think, how to determine what is true over what is not true. We can be convinced of anything if we accept bad evidence. Christians should be on board with this as well.

And yet they are not on board. Why?

 

[essentialsaltes]

I am a member of several Atheist forums. We welcome Theists unreservedly although we reserve the right to question the Theist's beliefs. Unlike this forum, full access to all of our threads are open to both Theists and Atheists alike. Generally, Theists are free to criticise us Atheists in whatever manner they choose, including the use of profanity. You see, from our perspective, truth has nothing to fear from inquiry.

Welcome, nice intro post. While I too am a big free speech fan and find the rules here somewhat constricting, at the same time... profanity is not inquiry. I certainly have nothing to fear from profanity. Nor do theists have anything to fear from atheist profanity. It gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that they are being persecuted by the world. Anyway, the rules of politeness here hopefully allow better discussions to take place.

How and why do people become Theists and, given the lack of evidence and recent scientific research, remain so.

Obviously, the vast majority are inculcated as children by their families or their surrounding culture. While I know the feeling you had when 'outed' in school, and your determination to be yourself, many people and many cultures are just not like that. There's a lot of "the nail that stands out gets nailed down" sentiment. I think it's been interesting to see the rise of the 'nones' in the US. It seems unlikely to me that people's opinions have changed that rapidly, so I conclude just that something in the culture has made it (slightly) more socially acceptable to stand out in this way. I think there are a lot of theists on the outside who are more agnostic on the inside. And as you poke around these forums... you'll run across many extremely vocal theists who sound more like they're trying to convince themselves.

 

[lostinthought]

Oh, dear, these are examples of your "logic and evidence," are they? This is indeed schoolboy atheism.

We're done because I now see that I am dealing with precisely what I suspected I was dealing with. I can see exactly where this discussion is going to go.

Ah, the ad hominems begin. A sure sign of a lost argument if ever there was. Why did you not address the issues I raised? As I said in an earler post, truth has no fear of investigation.

Atheism is Atheism. I'm unawares of a schoolboy version.

I have no idea where this discussion is going. It will go where it will go.

 

[Albion]

Let's start at the top, if I may:

If one begins with the premise: I don't know whether a god exists or not and one then follows the evidence in a logical and honest manner, one does not end up at the conclusion: There is a god.

This therefore begs the question: How and why do people become Theists and, given the lack of evidence and recent scientific research, remain so.

One becomes a theist because he is persuaded by logic and the evidence that there must be a God. You aren't so persuaded.

That's it.

And if I may suggest...the reason Theists may tend to shy away from your Atheist forums is because Atheists are united in denigrating Theists, but there is little for them to debate among themselves. "Don't believe in God" pretty much exhausts the discussion for Atheists whereas there are a myriad of events and concepts that Theists deal in.

 

[lostinthought]

I completely disagree. Theists and non-theists look at exactly the same evidence and simply reach different conclusions, and that debate has raged since there were words to have it.

Why is a lack of scientific research relevant?

The scientific method is single most reliable group of methods which most reliably explains the universe that we occupy.

Science isn't capable of determining God's existence.

And you can support this claim how?

Pick up a copy of Francis Schaeffer's trilogy and give it a read.

I will and, for your part, please read some books on Logic and Proof.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I dont like this liar-God notion.

God is just giving them what they are already itching to hear.

 

[durangodawood]

God is just giving them what they are already itching to hear.

Better to give nothing then... than to be a deceiver. My understanding is that the deceiver role belongs to someone else in the Christian understanding.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I didn't say that I'm a non-theist. I said I'm an Atheist.

Atheism is a response to the Theist claim that god exists. No more, no less. Atheism isn't a belief system. Atheists simply state that the Theist hypothesis that a god exists has failed to meet its burden of proof and, as such, reject the hypothesis.

Note that Atheists do not state that god does not exist. Apologies for the double negatives. Atheists merely reject the god hypothesis on the basis that the claim has not met its burden of proof.

If the god hypothesis does meet its burden of proof, then it would be dishonest and illogical not to amend our stance.

Perhaps final judgment is being held up by the endless appeals.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Better to give nothing then... than to be a deceiver. My understanding is that the deceiver role belongs to someone else in the Christian understanding.

God plays by his own rules.

2 Thessalonians 2:11
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

 

[durangodawood]

God plays by his own rules.

The "anything goes" rationalization. The problem with it is... it can lead anywhere.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The "anything goes" rationalization. The problem with it is... it can lead anywhere.

There are only two destinations; life, or death.

 

[durangodawood]

There are only two destinations; life, or death.

I think youre trying to be clever. But really youre just shifting the terms and topics of the conversation rather than confronting my objections head on. This will get old, wise guy.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Do you realize how many non sequiturs you have assembled in one short paragraph?

It was a summary, not an exhaustive history of my belief. It was a 2 year journey from theism to atheism.

Your concerns with God's MORALITY caused you to question God's EXISTENCE?

Yes, Because in actually studying the bible for myself I started to study god morality and realized I had no valid reason for belief through that process. What you say about me is incorrect.

Your study of philosophy and epistemology (a branch of philosophy) led you to conclude that you did not have "valid reasons" for belief - even though any number of first-rate philosophers and epistemologists are theists and there has been a dramatic upsurge in interest in theism in the philosophical disciplines?

There are first rate philosophers and epistemological that don't believe as well. You seem to be picking what people you want to believe and believe them. I have studied the material and have concluded that non belief is the only position to take based on the evidence.

Your studies of evolution caused you to "throw out the Bible as actual truth" and made you unconvinced God exists - even though mainstream, nontheistic scientists recognize that evolutionary theory is riddled with serious flaws, any number of serious scholars and scientists are theistic evolutionists, and any number of serious and distinguished theists do not regard the Bible as inerrant?

You need to relax. What I posted was a general summary. Evolution has overwhelming evidence for it to be believed. Have you studied why scientists believe it is happening and mot just apologists?

I was not talking about the entire bible as being false. What can be demonstrated to be true in the bible I believe. But the creation story and evolution cannot co exist.

As with the OP, it strikes me that you probably found a more appealing and emotionally satisfying landing spot in atheism for reasons having little or nothing to do with the reasons you give - because the reasons you give really don't hang together logically.

Like I said it was a general summary aimed at answering the op. The main points of my post was to suggest that we all need better epistemology and that many theists believe due to bad reasoning like myself. I disbelieve because the evidence is not sufficient for me. Please stop telling me what I think, I won't do that to you. Start another op and I will discuss any one of my reasons further.

 

[lostinthought]

One becomes a theist because he is persuaded by logic and the evidence that there must be a God. You aren't so persuaded.

I've heard claims of god on this forum - but no proof. I don't ask for much proof. I am easily satisfied. Just a little will be sufficient to amend my stance - that's all. I wait with bated breath. This is why I'm an Atheist. People make claims of proof and yet always fail to deliver. What is most often referred to as proof is, strictly speaking, faith a la 'god of the gaps' and argumentum ad populum etc.

That's it.

And if I may suggest...the reason Theists may tend to shy away from your Atheist forums is because Atheists are united in denigrating Theists, but there is little for them to debate among themselves. "Don't believe in God" pretty much exhausts the discussion for Atheists whereas there are a myriad of events and concepts that Theists deal in.

Actually, no. All Atheists ask for is one shred of evidence for the god hypothesis. That is all. However, we will not be fooled by so-called 'evidence' masquerading as faith. I guess, in the end, we get frustrated with dishonest and illogical antics. As regards our discussions, we discuss a myriad of topics including what sorts of things have been done in the world in the name of religion and science. However, debating with Theists is what we do best and what the Atheist forums were set up to do.

 

[Chesterton]

Before I begin, I'd like to state that I'm an Atheist.

As far as I can remember, although my parents were Theists, I have never been one. The thought of a god seems so improbably to me. It just makes no logical sense. As far as I am able to recall, I've always felt that a god was illogical and improbable.

I remember this one time at school I told one of the boys, that I considered a friend, that I didn't believe in god. I'm sure that there was a valid reason for telling him this but that is now lost in the mists of time. That must have been way back in the late 50s when the world was a very different place and when most people in the UK believed in god.

Anyways, later that day, the teacher asked the class to put up their hands if they believed in god. Obviously, my soon-to-be-ex-friend had snitched on me. No matter, my hand remained firmly down. Even in those days, I was a rebel.

The teacher noticed that only my hand remained down.

I was asked to come and stand in front of the class, caned on the hand and then made to stand in the corner with my back to the class until home time.

I remember the incident as though it were yesterday because it was the one and only time that I was ever punished by a teacher since, actually, I was a very keen and studious student.

The incident made no difference one way or the other. I didn't believe in god because it was illogical. Logic doesn't change. Neither has my attitude to religion.

I am a member of several Atheist forums. We welcome Theists unreservedly although we reserve the right to question the Theist's beliefs. Unlike this forum, full access to all of our threads are open to both Theists and Atheists alike. Generally, Theists are free to criticise us Atheists in whatever manner they choose, including the use of profanity. You see, from our perspective, truth has nothing to fear from inquiry. Even though christianity is supposedly about peace, love, understanding, acceptance and tolerance, it would appear that Atheists are far more tolerant of Theists than are Theists of Atheists, given that there are topics on this forum that are only open to christians.

At one time, drive-by Theists frequently dropped into our forums but they rarely stayed any length of time when they realised that we Atheists had able minds and used them in a logical and inquiring manner. Fools we weren't.

However, I can't quite remember when we last encountered a Theist. Our forums have become as quiet as the grave. Therefore, I though that I would drop in on you guys and gals for a spot of healthy debate.

Let's start at the top, if I may:

If one begins with the premise: I don't know whether a god exists or not and one then follows the evidence in a logical and honest manner, one does not end up at the conclusion: There is a god.

This therefore begs the question: How and why do people become Theists and, given the lack of evidence and recent scientific research, remain so.

What you say about atheist forums is laughable. I browsed them all back in the day. Any Christian setting foot on them immediately becomes a punching bag with all manner of vile comments and sick humor thrown at them. If there's an exception I never found it. The fact that you likewise seem to consider profanity as valid "criticism" of ideas speaks volumes.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

And yet they are not on board. Why?

Most will say they are, but when you start to discuss these things they are not in my experience. Not sure if it was Tyson that said if you want creationism in schools then let scientists teach science in your church. I believe most would not want this. When I was a believer I believed that science was aimed at disproving god, that it was untrustworthy. Many Christians think this way. Maybe a theist will answer you.