Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Just want to mention I identify with the responses to question 4. There are so many misconceptions going around among people that mostly associate only with those who agree with them, especially in religious groups. Indeed I identify with many of the other answers. I'm a skeptical type too, and don't agree with all I was brought up with. I do, of course, find some theistic arguments convincing, in a probabilistic way, but find others quite unconvincing.
A lot of best selling authors will be rather distressed to learn from your great store of knowledge. Guess they should all stop trying to write entirely as only those who already know them can understand what they write anyway!
Unfortunately, it IS a fact that any book cannot be understood correctly unless you are closely acquainted with the author. If you wrote a book today, can you guarantee that people 2000 years later will understand exactly what you meant? No, because people will interpret your words differently. That's not garbage, that's reality.
The Scripture is even more special, because it has a spiritual meaning to its literal words. To take the Scriptures literally is already a path of error.
There's nothing distressing about that. People either agree with or disagree with an author, and sometimes they disagree because they fail to understand exactly what is written or the reasoning of the author. An author will rather have people who read and criticise his work (whether it was from mere disagreement or from misunderstanding) than to have no readers.
The Scriptures, if misunderstood, will have far greater consequences. It, being spiritually discerned, makes the possibility of misunderstanding much higher.
I have never thought of gods as more than charters in books, movies, etc.I'm not sure where is best to put this thread, but this seems as good a place as any. I don't intend this to be a debate thread. Instead, I would like to understand atheists and atheism better, because I think we Christians often believe we know all about atheism, when actually we don't. So I'd like to learn about it from people who actually hold this view.
For the purposes of this thread, an 'atheist' can be defined as anyone who lives their life without reference to God, regardless of whether this is because they believe there is no God, don't know whether there is a God, or don't care about God. If you are in that category, I'd really like to hear from you.
Questions:
1) Have you always been an atheist, or did you become one? If you became one, could you outline the journey that brought you to atheism. If you have always been an atheist, could you outline the influences that brought that about (eg. the attitudes of family, friends, teachers, etc towards theistic belief).
"Abandoning atheism" is an odd term - no, I have never felt the need for religion.2) Have you ever come close or given serious consideration to abandoning atheism? If so, what were the reasons / arguments that you found most convincing for theism / religion?
They fail from the ground up. I may have only a laymen's level of understanding of cosmology, physics, neuroscience/consciousness, and biology, but every argument that has been presented to me to date either contradicts this knowledge, or just appears as a god-of-the-gaps argument.3) What arguments for theism / religion do you hear a lot but find completely unconvincing? Can you briefly explain why?
I have had many theists, just this month, tell me that I believe, but I just don't want to admit it, as if they can read my mind.4) Are there any misconceptions that you find that theists / religious people often have about atheism / atheists, which you often find yourself having to explain?
Being an atheist does not improve my life any more that not collecting stamps. It leaves time to do other things.5) Do you feel that being an atheist improves your life in some way? (eg. does it help you to be more moral, give you a sense of purpose, inspire you?) Or is it just an absence of God, with no significance for you, as not fishing is to a person who doesn't go fishing?
And with Scripture there seems to me top be a huge problem with how some Christians take it. They claim it at the least inspired by God, yet it is so unclear people cannot understand it, but they are perfectly capable of writing in clear and concise terms what it 'really means'. And much of the time in legalistic terms, prohibitions or commands to others.
If the literal meaning of Scripture is to be ignored there needs to be a good reason. One would think the good reasons for the start and end would be obvious. The start being that if it was literal the writer was not there and could not have had access to anyone who was. For the end it is that the entire book of Revelation is a vision and Scripture has multiple examples of visions that are not literal (In fact I do not recall a single vision that was literal).
Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13 that there will be things embedded in Scriptures that even Christians will only know in part and they will not be able to write a prophecy of the entire picture God has determined to happen. There is nothing inherently wrong about it, because God knows that to understand things in the future is difficult because our minds may not always perceive futuristic events fully.
For instance, a man who lives B.C, if given a vision of the future about airplanes, will only be able to use whatever language he is accustomed to using to describe the airplane according to what is revealed. He will definitely not call an airplane an airplane, nor an engine an engine. His words, if taken literally, will make absolutely no sense. That is why literal interpretations fall short, because the Scriptures are full of prophecies that God Himself must help the reader to understand seeing that it is written by people centuries or ages before. Even so, God may choose not to reveal the actual meaning behind a prophecy if He knows that the prophecy is not for "their time". This is what we see in Daniel 12:4.
There is also another reason why literal interpretations are to be disregarded: mainly that there is a spiritual reason for God's moral commands. Though some of God's commands are literal and direct, others are not. A person who takes these commands entirely literal will find contradictions among bible verses. Say for instance, in Leviticus God commands Israelites not to eat specific unclean animals. Yet in the NT Romans 14:20, Paul writes that "all food is clean". To take it literally means a contradiction. Still, God had a spiritual meaning behind "eat" and He revealed it to Peter in NT Acts 10. Eat, in a spiritual sense, is to associate and agree with. Therefore God's commands of "not to eat unclean animals" is really a command "not to associate with the ungodly".
Uh you mean like not eating and drinking with sinners and tax collectors?
I've seen where that kind of reasoning leads, to tehing like The Epistle of Barnabus.
Yes, Christians are of course free to comment; but they are also free not to - and I'm just asking that they exercise their freedom in that latter direction on this thread, so that understanding can be generated rather than heated argument. Especially at the Christmas season - peace and goodwill and all thatAlbion said:While Atheists are free to answer your questions, this IS a debate and discussion forum where Christians have as much right to discuss the issues as do Atheists.
6) Would you recommend religious people to become atheists (or give up their religion, if you prefer that way of putting it), or do you think it really doesn't matter whether people are religious or not? Do you think, in general, people are better off being religious, better off being non-religious, or does it not matter either way?
No, apparently it means something to them.6) Would you recommend religious people to become atheists (or give up their religion, if you prefer that way of putting it),
Matter in which way, matter for what?or do you think it really doesn't matter whether people are religious or not?
Religious people are better off being religious, non-religious people are better off being non-religious.Do you think, in general, people are better off being religious, better off being non-religious, or does it not matter either way?
I have never thought of gods as more than charters in books, movies, etc.
"Abandoning atheism" is an odd term - no, I have never felt the need for religion..
6) Would you recommend religious people to become atheists (or give up their religion, if you prefer that way of putting it), or do you think it really doesn't matter whether people are religious or not? Do you think, in general, people are better off being religious, better off being non-religious, or does it not matter either way?
Yes, Christians are of course free to comment; but they are also free not to - and I'm just asking that they exercise their freedom in that latter direction on this thread, so that understanding can be generated rather than heated argument. Especially at the Christmas season - peace and goodwill and all that
Many thanks to those who have contributed thus far. It's been really interesting and helpful.
Following the responses to Q5 in particular, can I add one more supplementary question to perhaps clarify my intent in asking?
6) Would you recommend religious people to become atheists (or give up their religion, if you prefer that way of putting it), or do you think it really doesn't matter whether people are religious or not? Do you think, in general, people are better off being religious, better off being non-religious, or does it not matter either way?
Thanks,
Roonwit
I would rather see people develop curiosity, openness to learning, and epistemic humility.
Consider it this way: people tend to question their faith and become atheists when the intellectual culture meets certain conditions (i.e., those qualities I described in my previous post). It's that culture that is valued, not atheism per se.
That depends on how you define fundamentalism... I tend to define it in such a way that by definition a fundamentalist wouldn't be open to questioning their beliefs - though by and large I don't find the term very helpful so I tend to avoid it!Archaeopteryx said:Notably, however, none of them are fundamentalists (in my experience).
That's a point worth bringing up. History shows that belief rises and falls, in part, as the wellbeing of society rises and falls. When the leading religious institutions become corrupt or incompetent, people turn to Atheism or Satanism--but it's not expressly because they have suddenly become convinced that those alternatives are literally correct in what they believe and teach.
I think certain conditions, culturally and personally, tend to encourage atheism more than others because they enable people to critically reflect on dogmas that religious authorities would rather not see questioned. .
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?